I am reading http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html . Yes LICENSE also needs to contain more things as well. Yes, there are several situations where NOTICE does not need to change, but this is the key sentence:
"Aside from Apache-licensed dependencies which supply NOTICE files of their own, it is uncommon for a dependency to require additions to NOTICE." Lots of the dependencies I see here are Apache-licensed dependencies with NOTICE files. The Apache License 2 clause 4 means any (relevant) parts of the NOTICE files must be included in a distribution, and the NOTICE file is the place for that*. Here's a correct (AFAIK) example from Spark: https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/NOTICE https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/LICENSE Some of the same dependencies are included in both. I don't see why this doesn't apply to Drill too? Unless the guidance above is out of date. * I am not clear whether distribution a .jar, which has its NOTICE file embedded, "counts". This would not be the case in an 'uber' jar the the project distributes, and there are some third-party uber jars here like hive-exec, but I don't see a Drill uber jar. Maybe that counts; maybe it's safer just to populate NOTICE appropriately. Or, avoid shipping copies of all these jars directly? On Sat, Oct 11, 2014 at 7:17 AM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> wrote: > Actually, the licensing howto says things like this: > > In LICENSE, add a pointer <http://s.apache.org/Hqj> to the dependency's > license within the source tree and a short note summarizing its licensing: > > This product bundles SuperWidget 1.2.3, which is available under a > > "3-clause BSD" license. For details, see deps/superwidget/. > > Under normal circumstances, there is no need to modify NOTICE. > > Over and over again, it is emphasized that NOTICE does not need to be > modified and that the reference should be in the LICENSE file. > > This seems to contradict your assertion that these references need to be in > the NOTICE file. > > Are you sure we are reading the same document? > > On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 1:30 PM, Sean Owen <sro...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> No I just went straight for the binary distribution: >> >> >> http://people.apache.org/~smp/apache-drill-0.6.0.rc0/apache-drill-0.6.0-incubating.tar.gz >> >> This contains the third-party jar files in jars/. >> >> I assume http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html is still the >> law of the land so to speak and indicates that lots of these things >> need to be in NOTICE. >> >> >> On Oct 10, 2014 9:24 PM, "Ted Dunning" <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > Sean, >> > >> > Are you talking about the src distribution after doing the build? >> > >> > Before doing the build or after [mvn clean], there are no jars in the >> > distribution. >> > >> > Videlicet: >> > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> 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
