On Tuesday, December 12, 2023 at 6:37:18 AM UTC-7 Jesse Glick wrote:
On Tue, Dec 12, 2023 at 7:44 AM Mark Waite wrote: The changes made to wrap the library into the plugin are usually not very large Well. In https://github.com/jenkinsci/apache-httpcomponents-client-4-api-plugin/blob/d43026ee871292547b224f11d6a2016303720165/src/main/java/io/jenkins/plugins/httpclient/RobustHTTPClient.java#L2-L4 for example the code does not consist of “changes” to the wrapped library, it is fresh Jenkins-specific development; and while not large it is certainly not trivial (well above the threshold considered significant for copyright). I think it is appropriate for the *plugin* to remain under the MIT license like most of the rest of Jenkins code. Obviously the JAR it bundles is under a different license, but so what? The license refers to the source files in the repository. As to plugins which bundle a third-party library and have absolutely nothing in `src/` other than `src/main/resources/index.jelly`, I guess it is less confusing to just mark the plugin with the same license, though I am not sure it makes any practical difference since the only conceivably significant “source” would be in `pom.xml` and this is most often pure boilerplate plus predictable `<dependencies>`. (Or `cd.yaml`, which is almost always just a copy from template.) I like that very much. That would keep the Apache HTTP Components 4 library as MIT licensed but might guide other plugins to adopt the license of the library they wrap. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to jenkinsci-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/63509238-bbda-4a33-9467-69b15329419bn%40googlegroups.com.
