License questions for RC3

[Yaniv Rodenski <ya...@shinto.io>]

Hi All,

As we are preparing for version 0.2.0-incubating-RC3, I've added the Apache
Rat plugin and started verifying we have correct licenses for everything.

Before we try to release the RC, I wanted to verify two points:

   1. I've had to add the following exclusions from the plugin:
   ["**/build/**", '**/.gradle/**', '**/gradle/**', '**/.idea/**',
   '**/.ruby-version/**', '**/repo/**', '**/resources/**', '**/*.iml/**']
   Is that a valid configuration?
   2. Looking at the built output, we currently have one dependency
   packaged which is the codegen python package which has a BSD license. Is
   that an issue? if so, an alternative approach would be to install it via
   pip during Amaterasu's setup stage, is that a valid solution?

Thanks in advance,
-- 
Yaniv Rodenski

+61 477 778 405
yaniv@shinto.io

Re: License questions for RC3

[Yaniv Rodenski <ya...@shinto.io>]

Thanks Davor,

I'll update the license and prepare for releasing RC3

Cheers,
Yaniv


On Tue, May 15, 2018 at 1:23 PM, Davor Bonaci <da...@apache.org> wrote:

> >
> >    1. I've had to add the following exclusions from the plugin:
> >    ["**/build/**", '**/.gradle/**', '**/gradle/**', '**/.idea/**',
> >    '**/.ruby-version/**', '**/repo/**', '**/resources/**', '**/*.iml/**']
> >    Is that a valid configuration?
> >
>
> Usually, "rat" is configured to run on a clean codebase, so (most)
> temporary files don't cause false positives.
>
> It is fine to add manual exclusions, but please make sure that any
> exclusions (1) aren't part of the release, and (2) are not required for the
> project in some environment.
>
>    2. Looking at the built output, we currently have one dependency
> >    packaged which is the codegen python package which has a BSD license.
> Is
> >    that an issue?
>
>
> Not an issue. Please follow LICENSE/NOTICE requirements. Typically, the
> license text including the copyright statement needs to be added to the
> LICENSE file.
>
> if so, an alternative approach would be to install it via
> >    pip during Amaterasu's setup stage, is that a valid solution?
> >
>
> On the policy standpoint, there's no difference between the approaches. In
> both cases, the dependencies must satisfy the same requirements. Between
> the two, please pick the approach that you prefer. (There's a likely small
> difference in crafting the LICENSE/NOTICE files between these two cases.)
>



-- 
Yaniv Rodenski

+61 477 778 405
yaniv@shinto.io

Re: License questions for RC3

[Davor Bonaci <da...@apache.org>]

>
>    1. I've had to add the following exclusions from the plugin:
>    ["**/build/**", '**/.gradle/**', '**/gradle/**', '**/.idea/**',
>    '**/.ruby-version/**', '**/repo/**', '**/resources/**', '**/*.iml/**']
>    Is that a valid configuration?
>

Usually, "rat" is configured to run on a clean codebase, so (most)
temporary files don't cause false positives.

It is fine to add manual exclusions, but please make sure that any
exclusions (1) aren't part of the release, and (2) are not required for the
project in some environment.

   2. Looking at the built output, we currently have one dependency
>    packaged which is the codegen python package which has a BSD license. Is
>    that an issue?


Not an issue. Please follow LICENSE/NOTICE requirements. Typically, the
license text including the copyright statement needs to be added to the
LICENSE file.

if so, an alternative approach would be to install it via
>    pip during Amaterasu's setup stage, is that a valid solution?
>

On the policy standpoint, there's no difference between the approaches. In
both cases, the dependencies must satisfy the same requirements. Between
the two, please pick the approach that you prefer. (There's a likely small
difference in crafting the LICENSE/NOTICE files between these two cases.)