On 26 June 2012 14:46, Kevan Miller <kevan.mil...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Jun 26, 2012, at 9:40 AM, sebb wrote: > >> On 26 June 2012 13:28, seba.wag...@gmail.com <seba.wag...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Thanks for the feedback and review so far! >>> >>> About correct attribution of ASF JARs >>> Do they need a reference in the LICENSE file at all ? >> >> The recipient of the package needs to be able to quickly find the >> license associated with all jars, so I would say yes. >> >>> Must the name of the JAR file be _exactly_ mentioned in the LICENSE file? >>> For example: >>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/openmeetings/tags/2.0RC2/LICENSE?view=markup >>> Line: 206 >>> "For GlassFish components / activation.jar" >>> => Do we need to write "activation-jar-1.1.jar" instead of "activation.jar" >>> ? >> >> Yes, because licenses may change between versions. > > I've seen 'activation-jar-x.x.jar' used to good effect. In either case, the > key would be that the license must be validated when the version is changed > and when the release is being generated/reviewed. As long as that occurs an > explicit name or a suitably descriptive name would be sufficient…
If the license is not tied to the specific jar version in the LICENSE file, then this info will have to be held elsewhere to ensure that version changes can be properly validated by the committers. Keeping the version in the LICENSE file is very simple, and is helpful both to the end-user and the reviewer. > --kevan > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
