Thanks, Marvin. So remove the copyrights from NOTICE. Are they required anywhere then, as their not in the LICENSE file?
On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 2:57 PM, Marvin Humphrey <mar...@rectangular.com>wrote: > On Wed, Mar 26, 2014 at 12:59 PM, James Taylor <jamestay...@apache.org> > wrote: > > Below is our updated NOTICE (which includes the copyright for the bundled > > bits) and LICENSE (minus the standard Apache 2.0 part). > > > > Would appreciate a review. > > What follows is a superficial review of what I see in this email thread -- > I > have not checked the distribution to see whether or not bits are actually > bundled, nor have I checked the Phoenix mailing list archives. > > The proposed LICENSE file looks OK. It is not necessary to embed the > complete > text for MIT, 2-clause BSD and 3-clause BSD -- pointers suffice -- but it > is > not forbidden, either. > > The proposed NOTICE file contains a bunch of extraneous copyright notices. > Their presence in NOTICE constitutes a licensing documentation bug and they > should be removed. See the licensing how-to, as well as this mail for > additional explanation: > > http://markmail.org/message/shez7ys3qnnewl4a > > Because the file is named "NOTICE", people tend to think it's for > anything > notice-ish. This is a pernicious misconception which keeps coming back > over and over like a weed... > > Best, > > Marvin Humphrey > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
