On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 4:16 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacre...@apache.org > wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 4:00 PM, Reto Bachmann-Gmür <r...@apache.org> > wrote: > > On Mon, Jan 23, 2012 at 2:27 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz < > bdelacre...@apache.org > >> wrote: > >>... The cleanest way to handle that for Clerezza > >> might be to add a note to the LICENSE file that lists which other > >> licenses besides Apache are included, and points to a text file with > >> licensing information for those additional dependencies. Putting some > >> simple structure in that file might help automating (at least > >> partially) that check for future releases. > >> > > I prefer having different files for the different licenses so that two > > LICENSE*-files always have the same content... > > Ok, but note > http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#distributing-code-under-several-licenses > which says " all license information should be contained in the > LICENSE file". > > Looking for an example I took a closer look at sling. - I've noticed that in most sling projects there are two license files, e.g.: ./bundles/jcr/jackrabbit-usermanager/src/main/resources/META-INF/LICENSE and ./bundles/jcr/jackrabbit-usermanager/LICENSE not sure what this is for - some subcomponents, like bundles/commons/json/ contain no LICENSE or NOTICE file at all. - some subcomponents have additional licenses in their LICENSE file, e.g. commons/mime contains a BSD license for JQuery TreeTable plugin. - Other subcomponents contain js-files with copyright headers (e.g. ./bundles/extensions/explorer/src/main/resources/libs/sling/explorer/js/jquery-1.4.2.min.js contains a copyright by the DOJO foundation), this copyright is not repeated in NOTICE or LICENSE file - The launchpad projects contain no LICENSE files at all and org.apache.sling.launchpad-7-SNAPSHOT-standalone.jar contains a license file in META-INF with only the apache license despite containing the commons/mine jar which itself contains the BSD license for JQuery TreeTable. - The source jar generated when building sling with the apache-release profile contains a LICENSE containing a license for JSON in Java (which contains the sentence "The Software shall be used for Good, not Evil."). The BSD license is contained in bundles/commons/mine/LICENSE. If sling is a good example to look at (and I hope it is) then the summary is that it is enough to have a license either in the component or in the project the component is distributed with. With the note added to the clerezza readme we made this even more transparent. Also it is not necessary to repeat the copyright information contained in js files in NOTICE or LICENSE files (asked this question on apache-legal before). So the only remaining thing seems to merge the license files together to comply with http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#distributing-code-under-several-licenses. Other opinions? Cheers, Reto
