You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@groovy.apache.org by Paul King <pa...@asert.com.au> on 2015/07/19 04:08:29 UTC
Fwd: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Groovy 2.4.4-incubating (Mentor question)
Just one question I had wrt "BUNDLING PERMISSIVELY-LICENSED DEPENDENCIES".
(from http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps)
It states: "Under normal circumstances, there is no need to modify NOTICE."
Currently I have things like this in some of the NOTICE files:
This product includes/uses the git.io/normalize.css stylesheet
which is distributed under the MIT license
Copyright (c) Nicolas Gallagher and Jonathan Neal
This product includes/uses Jline (http://jline.sourceforge.net)
Distributed under the BSD license
Copyright (c) 2002-2006, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mw...@cornell.edu>
And I have the appropriate license text embedded in the LICENSE.
(No short form is currently possible since we don't have the whole
of those projects embedded as dependencies just single source files).
Should I delete those entries from NOTICE since they are permissive
licenses? What are the circumstances which aren't considered "normal"
in terms of the howto wording?
Thanks, Paul.
-------- Forwarded Message --------
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Groovy 2.4.4-incubating
Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2015 11:21:26 +1000
From: Paul King <pa...@asert.com.au>
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
To: general@incubator.apache.org
On 14/07/2015 7:00 AM, Justin Mclean wrote:
> Hi,
>
>> We don't bundle the source from any of those libraries true, but we do generate sources as part of our build using ANTLR and we do bundle the class files from the ANLTR and ASM projects in some of our jars and we do bundle the jars from some of those projects in some of our binary zips. So, only use of source files is important for NOTICE/LICENSE or would we need slightly different versions of those files in different places?
>
> Yes only refer to what is bundled [1] and yes the NOTICE/LICENSE files would need to be different [2].
We ended up needing ten different NOTICE (and respectively LICENSE) variants but we should be good now for another release. We might try to get someone to do a pre-check on a snapshot before we attempt a formal release.
Cheers, Paul.
> 1. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#guiding-principle
> 2. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#binary
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Re: Fwd: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Groovy 2.4.4-incubating (Mentor
question)
Posted by Emmanuel Lécharny <el...@gmail.com>.
Le 19/07/15 04:08, Paul King a écrit :
>
> Just one question I had wrt "BUNDLING PERMISSIVELY-LICENSED
> DEPENDENCIES".
> (from http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps)
>
> It states: "Under normal circumstances, there is no need to modify
> NOTICE."
>
> Currently I have things like this in some of the NOTICE files:
>
> This product includes/uses the git.io/normalize.css stylesheet
> which is distributed under the MIT license
> Copyright (c) Nicolas Gallagher and Jonathan Neal
>
> This product includes/uses Jline (http://jline.sourceforge.net)
> Distributed under the BSD license
> Copyright (c) 2002-2006, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mw...@cornell.edu>
>
> And I have the appropriate license text embedded in the LICENSE.
> (No short form is currently possible since we don't have the whole
> of those projects embedded as dependencies just single source files).
>
> Should I delete those entries from NOTICE since they are permissive
> licenses? What are the circumstances which aren't considered "normal"
> in terms of the howto wording?
No idea. As said in thepage you mentionned : " Some of these may require
additions to |NOTICE| -- if in doubt, ask
<http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#asking-questions>." and here,
"ask" referes to http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#asking-questions
Re: JLine in NOTICE
Posted by Paul King <pa...@asert.com.au>.
Indeed, I'll change that. I'll point to the github code site for now.
It has a link to the github.io project information page but not vice
versa at the moment.
Thanks, Paul.
On 19/07/2015 6:52 PM, Pascal Schumacher wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> as we are using JLine2 shouldn't the Jline part be changed to this:
>
> This product includes/uses Jline2 (http://jline.github.io/jline2)
> Distributed under the BSD license
> Copyright (c) 2002-2012, the original author or authors.
>
> source: https://github.com/jline/jline2/blob/master/LICENSE.txt
>
> ?
>
> -Pascal
>
> p.s.: Thanks for all your hard work on the license/notice files.
>
> Am 19.07.2015 um 04:08 schrieb Paul King:
>>
>> Just one question I had wrt "BUNDLING PERMISSIVELY-LICENSED DEPENDENCIES".
>> (from http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps)
>>
>> It states: "Under normal circumstances, there is no need to modify NOTICE."
>>
>> Currently I have things like this in some of the NOTICE files:
>>
>> This product includes/uses the git.io/normalize.css stylesheet
>> which is distributed under the MIT license
>> Copyright (c) Nicolas Gallagher and Jonathan Neal
>>
>> This product includes/uses Jline (http://jline.sourceforge.net)
>> Distributed under the BSD license
>> Copyright (c) 2002-2006, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mw...@cornell.edu>
>>
>> And I have the appropriate license text embedded in the LICENSE.
>> (No short form is currently possible since we don't have the whole
>> of those projects embedded as dependencies just single source files).
>>
>> Should I delete those entries from NOTICE since they are permissive
>> licenses? What are the circumstances which aren't considered "normal"
>> in terms of the howto wording?
>>
>> Thanks, Paul.
>>
>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Groovy 2.4.4-incubating
>> Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2015 11:21:26 +1000
>> From: Paul King <pa...@asert.com.au>
>> Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
>> To: general@incubator.apache.org
>>
>> On 14/07/2015 7:00 AM, Justin Mclean wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>>> We don't bundle the source from any of those libraries true, but we do generate sources as part of our build using ANTLR and we do bundle the class files from the ANLTR and ASM projects in some of our jars and we do bundle the jars from some of those projects in some of our binary zips. So, only use of source files is important for NOTICE/LICENSE or would we need slightly different versions of those files in different places?
>>>
>>> Yes only refer to what is bundled [1] and yes the NOTICE/LICENSE files would need to be different [2].
>>
>> We ended up needing ten different NOTICE (and respectively LICENSE) variants but we should be good now for another release. We might try to get someone to do a pre-check on a snapshot before we attempt a formal release.
>>
>> Cheers, Paul.
>>
>>> 1. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#guiding-principle
>>> 2. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#binary
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---
>> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
>> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>>
>
>
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
JLine in NOTICE (was: Re: Fwd: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Groovy
2.4.4-incubating (Mentor question))
Posted by Pascal Schumacher <pa...@gmx.net>.
Hi Paul,
as we are using JLine2 shouldn't the Jline part be changed to this:
This product includes/uses Jline2 (http://jline.github.io/jline2)
Distributed under the BSD license
Copyright (c) 2002-2012, the original author or authors.
source: https://github.com/jline/jline2/blob/master/LICENSE.txt
?
-Pascal
p.s.: Thanks for all your hard work on the license/notice files.
Am 19.07.2015 um 04:08 schrieb Paul King:
>
> Just one question I had wrt "BUNDLING PERMISSIVELY-LICENSED
> DEPENDENCIES".
> (from http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps)
>
> It states: "Under normal circumstances, there is no need to modify
> NOTICE."
>
> Currently I have things like this in some of the NOTICE files:
>
> This product includes/uses the git.io/normalize.css stylesheet
> which is distributed under the MIT license
> Copyright (c) Nicolas Gallagher and Jonathan Neal
>
> This product includes/uses Jline (http://jline.sourceforge.net)
> Distributed under the BSD license
> Copyright (c) 2002-2006, Marc Prud'hommeaux <mw...@cornell.edu>
>
> And I have the appropriate license text embedded in the LICENSE.
> (No short form is currently possible since we don't have the whole
> of those projects embedded as dependencies just single source files).
>
> Should I delete those entries from NOTICE since they are permissive
> licenses? What are the circumstances which aren't considered "normal"
> in terms of the howto wording?
>
> Thanks, Paul.
>
> -------- Forwarded Message --------
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Groovy 2.4.4-incubating
> Date: Sun, 19 Jul 2015 11:21:26 +1000
> From: Paul King <pa...@asert.com.au>
> Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
>
> On 14/07/2015 7:00 AM, Justin Mclean wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>> We don't bundle the source from any of those libraries true, but we
>>> do generate sources as part of our build using ANTLR and we do
>>> bundle the class files from the ANLTR and ASM projects in some of
>>> our jars and we do bundle the jars from some of those projects in
>>> some of our binary zips. So, only use of source files is important
>>> for NOTICE/LICENSE or would we need slightly different versions of
>>> those files in different places?
>>
>> Yes only refer to what is bundled [1] and yes the NOTICE/LICENSE
>> files would need to be different [2].
>
> We ended up needing ten different NOTICE (and respectively LICENSE)
> variants but we should be good now for another release. We might try
> to get someone to do a pre-check on a snapshot before we attempt a
> formal release.
>
> Cheers, Paul.
>
>> 1. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#guiding-principle
>> 2. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#binary
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
>
>
>
> ---
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> https://www.avast.com/antivirus
>