Hi Justin,
Some more questions on the LICENSE(/NOTICE).
On Sat, Mar 30, 2019 at 2:43 AM Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com>
wrote:
> I think there some more work to do on licensing here, and these will be
> needed to be fixed in a later release:
> - You are not compiling with the terms of the licenses of the software you
> have bundled. Most licenses need for you to include the full text of the
> license and not just list it license. This is an issue with most of the dtd
> files, note that some licenses include a copyright line so a single copy of
> that type of license is not enough.
>
The LICENSE file has a table that maps a file to its license "key" and the
license is then stored in the (top-level) "licenses" directory (in the
header of the table, there is a note about that: "text is in file in
licenses directory"). We used to put all the licenses into the LICENSE
file, but we were told that is confusing (as the LICENSE file gets fairly
huge, esp. for the convenience binary), so the licenses were put into a
separate directory. We could easily place everything to the LICENSE file
again. Or we can change the reference in the table in the LICENSE file to
read like "licenses/CDDL-1.0" instead of "CDDL-1.0". Either of these should
be a fairly easy thing.
> - As well as listing the 3rd party files it would be to also see the
> product and version number included.
> - As it is currently structured it’s not easily possible to check if you
> are including all of the needed licenses in LICENSES as you are also
> including the text of licenses of things that are not bundled but are
> dependancies, so I’m been unable to check if LICENSE and NOTICE are correct.
>
Do you mean licenses under nbbuild/licenses and under the modules, like:
java/maven.embedder/external? The LICENSE file should not refer to them
(that only ever refers to the top-level licenses directory), so these
should be OK? (We need them so that we can construct the correct LICENSE
file for the convenience binaries.)
> - A spot check show that things are bundled but not mentioned in LICENSE
> as they need to be, for example [1][2]. I would expect there to be others.
> - It also look like you are including image file that you do not have
> permission to distribute
>
> Give all of the above this release is almost impossible to check if it in
> compliance with ASF release, distribution or legal policies and some
> improvement need to be made so that it can be.
>
> Thanks,
> Justin
>
> 1.
> ./ide/css.editor/test/unit/src/org/netbeans/modules/css/editor/module/main/properties/PropertiesATest.java
>
What is the problem with this file? Looking at the file, I am not sure
what's the problem.
> 2.
> ./php/php.editor/test/unit/data/testfiles/actions/testImportData/libs/nette.min.php
>
Yes, this definitely should be included in LICENSE.
Thanks,
Jan
> 3.
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/2b6ad0d98a9342595da27902f25e7c43c4291738154eedc8b33afb5e@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>
