On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 8:44 AM, Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
> Hi, > > > I guess I originally misunderstood the requirements here - I though that > > these only need to be in the top-level of a release (we are not releasing > > the jars separatelly). Should be fairly easy to add those to jars the > > NetBeans build system produces. > > It a bit hidden but documented here [1] it more one of those assumed > knowledge things. It certainly help people to know how those jars are > licensed. The review of your binary release would of taken 1/2 the amount > time if all of the jar contained their license (and notice) files. > Thanks. I'll look at how to include that. I assume the usual conditions apply, i.e. that the license and notice in each jar should only refer to what's in the jar, right? (As a consequence the content might differ among modules in general.) > > > ./ide/modules/org-openidex-util.jar > >> - CDDL licensed missing in LICENSE > >> > > > > Hm, this should be under Apache 2.0 - this is built from > "o.openidex.util" > > from the source bundle. Is there something we need to fix so it does not > > appear to be under CDDL? > > Well the jar doesn’t contain any license but a google search of the jar > name indicated it was CDDL I could be wrong. > I suspect that this will be true for almost all NetBeans jars. As NetBeans was under CDDL-GPL-2-CP. > > > Apache Felix is using those as well, I think? > > They may well do but TLP don’t always get things 100% right (the lucerne > NOTICE file for instance) so IMO we should try and work what is the right > hing to do here. > > >> - are the copyright lines in NOTICE correct here? > > > > I don't know, it has been released this way. > > If that the case "Copyright 2017 NetBeans” is probably not correct it > should be copyright ASF right? Or are the jars not generated from source in > the Apache Netbeans project? > > > Ah, I guess the naming may be confusing here - I believe these are > standard > > NetBeans artifacts, for certain core stuff NetBeans is using > "org.openide" > > package (and module name). Built from openide.compat and openide.dialogs > in > > the source bundle, respectively. Is there something we can do to reduce > > confusion? > > Change the package name perhaps? Not that it needs to be done right away > and they may be good reasons for not changing it if other projects rely on > it. > Everything under org.openide is an API, so I don't think changing that name is an option, sorry. Jan > > Thanks, > Justin > > 1. http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#licensing-documentation > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > >
