On 1 April 2018 at 13:28, Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote: > Hi, > >> non-bundled Dependencies are irrelevant to the contents of NOTICE and >> LICENSE. > > Yep 100% agree. > >> Though of course the license does affect whether it is allowed to be a >> dependency. > > Also agree. > >> NOTICE and LICENSE are only for bits that are bundled in the release >> artifact. > > Yep 100% in agreement. > >> The LICENSE file must reflect the license(s) for all the bundled bits. > > Yep - in this case it’s missing some stuff here but that’s minor. > >> The NOTICE file must include all required notices and nothing more. > > And in this case it includes more than is needed. Do you disagree?
I have not looked at the NOTICE file. I was responding to your statement: "if something is bundled then it's license and copyright needs to be in LICENSE not NOTICE." As noted above, I don't think that is true. >> Bundled 3rd party code *can* affect the NOTICE file. >> That's why it is important to only include required notices. > > But usually doesn’t with MIT or BSD licenses as is the case here. In most > cases required notices are quite rare. Indeed, but that does not make the statement true. > Thanks, > Justin > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > 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
