Hi Ant, I didn't intend to make up stuff on the fly, especially policy.
After having been through the fine points of LICENSE vs. NOTICE so many times, I thought the consensus was to put *all* licenses into the top level LICENSE file. But having just scoured the official public pages promulgating policy, I can't find it.
Let's continue the discussion.I still believe that it's bad form to put licenses in several places in distributions because users might not find them and thereby not know what they're getting.
Craig On Aug 18, 2009, at 9:19 AM, Craig L Russell wrote:
Hi Ant, On Aug 18, 2009, at 8:53 AM, ant elder wrote:For the recent LICENSE and NOTICE file issues the current policy allows for the different approaches, different TLPs use differentapproaches, there's not been consensus on a single approach, and thereare relevant JIRAs open with legal that aren't yet resolved.Please correct me, but the recent discussion about LICENSE and NOTICE wrt release was a release that did not have licenses for third party projects that are part of the release, neither in LICENSE nor in NOTICE.We can discuss (and will continue to do so) where the best place is for licenses, notices, and copyrights (sometimes these are one and the same) but to omit them entirely is just wrong.Craig Craig L Russell Incubator PMC, DB PMC, OpenJPA PMC c...@apache.org http://db.apache.org/jdo
Craig L Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:craig.russ...@sun.com P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
