You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to nmaven-dev@incubator.apache.org by Shane Isbell <sh...@gmail.com> on 2008/02/19 17:30:42 UTC
Remaining Issues For NMaven Release
Based on feedback from the general incubator list, we have the following
issues
OUTSTANDING
Copyright Name - Should the copyright contain ASF or Apache NMaven?
According to Brett, it should be ASF, which also sounds right to me. Looking
through the incubator project releases: cxf, tika, felix, I also see ASF.
Itemized Notice File - This is done by default. I'm not sure how to remove
the itemization or whether this is necessary.
.asc.sha1 files - This is also done by default. Looking through the Maven
project in the central repo, I see the same thing. Is this something that we
should be concerned with?
SOLVED
License headers in test classes
Incorrect Start Date on Copyright
Manifest entry to contain target and source versions
Thanks,
Shane
Re: Remaining Issues For NMaven Release
Posted by Jason van Zyl <ja...@maven.org>.
Nothing there in OUTSTANDING is critical.
Nice work, let it fly!
On 19-Feb-08, at 9:30 AM, Shane Isbell wrote:
> Based on feedback from the general incubator list, we have the
> following
> issues
>
> OUTSTANDING
> Copyright Name - Should the copyright contain ASF or Apache NMaven?
> According to Brett, it should be ASF, which also sounds right to me.
> Looking
> through the incubator project releases: cxf, tika, felix, I also see
> ASF.
> Itemized Notice File - This is done by default. I'm not sure how to
> remove
> the itemization or whether this is necessary.
> .asc.sha1 files - This is also done by default. Looking through the
> Maven
> project in the central repo, I see the same thing. Is this something
> that we
> should be concerned with?
>
> SOLVED
> License headers in test classes
> Incorrect Start Date on Copyright
> Manifest entry to contain target and source versions
>
> Thanks,
> Shane
Thanks,
Jason
----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder, Apache Maven
jason at sonatype dot com
----------------------------------------------------------
Three people can keep a secret provided two of them are dead.
-- Unknown
Re: Remaining Issues For NMaven Release
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
On 20/02/2008, at 4:30 AM, Shane Isbell wrote:
> Itemized Notice File - This is done by default. I'm not sure how to
> remove
> the itemization or whether this is necessary.
I don't believe it's necessary to remove the additional information.
If you do need to do so, it would be by including a NOTICE file
generated by hand. ISTR some debate over the different forms of NOTICE
file but I'm not sure it was ever resolved.
>
> .asc.sha1 files - This is also done by default. Looking through the
> Maven
> project in the central repo, I see the same thing. Is this something
> that we
> should be concerned with?
It's just a bug - unnecessary files, but not harmful.
>
>
> SOLVED
> License headers in test classes
> Incorrect Start Date on Copyright
> Manifest entry to contain target and source versions
Thanks.
Cheers,
Brett
--
Brett Porter
brett@apache.org
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
Re: Remaining Issues For NMaven Release
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 20/02/2008, Brett Porter <br...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> On 20/02/2008, at 1:04 PM, sebb wrote:
>
> > On 19/02/2008, Shane Isbell <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Based on feedback from the general incubator list, we have the
> >> following
> >> issues
> >>
> >> OUTSTANDING
> >> Copyright Name - Should the copyright contain ASF or Apache NMaven?
> >> According to Brett, it should be ASF, which also sounds right to
> >> me. Looking
> >> through the incubator project releases: cxf, tika, felix, I also
> >> see ASF.
> >
> > The Notice file(s) in the jars should contain something like
> >
> > Apache NMaven
> > Copyright 2006-2008 The Apache Software Foundation
> >
> > (i.e. as per
> > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/nmaven/tags/maven-dotnet-parent-0.15-incubating/NOTICE.txt
> > )
> >
> > *not*
> >
> > maven-archetype-dotnet-class-library
> > Copyright 2006-2008 The Apache Software Foundation
> >
> > IMO that does need to be fixed.
>
> I don't think this is critical - but changing it to Apache NMaven or
> Apache NMaven :: DotNet Class Library would certainly be an improvement.
>
> >
> >
> >> Itemized Notice File - This is done by default. I'm not sure how to
> >> remove
> >> the itemization or whether this is necessary.
> >
> > I think it's created by the remote resources plugin.
> > Just remove that and use the NOTICE file that is already in SVN.
>
> I'm not sure it's incorrect now - if you look at the example that the
> Apache licensing site gives, it is itemised:
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/example-NOTICE.txt
>
In the example-NOTICE file, there is one entry per organisation, and
the file only contains details of software that is actually included,
not software that is used. The entry for the ASF does not itemise
individual products. There is no // header.
However I do agree that individual non-ASF products *that are
included* could be itemised, if only to make it easier to ensure that
the required notices are present. It is probably not necessary, as the
NOTICE file is for required notices.
Now the generated NOTICE file in
http://people.apache.org/~sisbell/staging-repo/org/apache/maven/dotnet/maven-dotnet-compiler/0.15-incubating/maven-dotnet-compiler-0.15-incubating.jar
looks (and is) very different from the example.
As I wrote before, unless the project distribution artifacts include
non ASF code, then the existing NOTICE file at the top-level of SVN is
all that is needed for the jars.
NOTICE files are only for included items.
> as is the description for it's content:
> http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice
>
> >
> >
> > Likewise, I think the existing NOTICE files in the jars need to be
> > fixed.
> >
> >> .asc.sha1 files - This is also done by default. Looking through the
> >> Maven
> >> project in the central repo, I see the same thing. Is this
> >> something that we
> >> should be concerned with?
> >
> > That's not at all urgent.
>
> Agree.
>
> >
> >
> >> SOLVED
> >>
> >> License headers in test classes
> >
> > However there are still quite a few other source files that don't have
> > headers, for example:
> >
> > maven-dotnet.iml
> > maven-dotnet.ipr
>
> These are generated by IDEA. I'm not sure why they are in SVN, but
> they don't need licenses. They should be excluded from any source
> distribution though.
>
Agreed - they should be removed (or ignored) in SVN.
> >
> > archetypes/maven-archetype-class-library/src/main/resources/
> > archetype-resources/pom.xml
>
> This is a template that will be used to generate another pom.xml, so
> it shouldn't include the license as that'll appear in the output (and
> the user may not want to license it as such)
Perhaps consider naming the files as .template so this is obvious?
There are some other files I did not list, e.g. the site.xml, .apt
and .cs files.
The RAT tool will show the full list.
> Cheers,
> Brett
>
> --
> Brett Porter
> brett@apache.org
> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
>
>
Re: Remaining Issues For NMaven Release
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
On 20/02/2008, at 1:04 PM, sebb wrote:
> On 19/02/2008, Shane Isbell <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Based on feedback from the general incubator list, we have the
>> following
>> issues
>>
>> OUTSTANDING
>> Copyright Name - Should the copyright contain ASF or Apache NMaven?
>> According to Brett, it should be ASF, which also sounds right to
>> me. Looking
>> through the incubator project releases: cxf, tika, felix, I also
>> see ASF.
>
> The Notice file(s) in the jars should contain something like
>
> Apache NMaven
> Copyright 2006-2008 The Apache Software Foundation
>
> (i.e. as per
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/nmaven/tags/maven-dotnet-parent-0.15-incubating/NOTICE.txt
> )
>
> *not*
>
> maven-archetype-dotnet-class-library
> Copyright 2006-2008 The Apache Software Foundation
>
> IMO that does need to be fixed.
I don't think this is critical - but changing it to Apache NMaven or
Apache NMaven :: DotNet Class Library would certainly be an improvement.
>
>
>> Itemized Notice File - This is done by default. I'm not sure how to
>> remove
>> the itemization or whether this is necessary.
>
> I think it's created by the remote resources plugin.
> Just remove that and use the NOTICE file that is already in SVN.
I'm not sure it's incorrect now - if you look at the example that the
Apache licensing site gives, it is itemised:
http://www.apache.org/licenses/example-NOTICE.txt
as is the description for it's content:
http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice
>
>
> Likewise, I think the existing NOTICE files in the jars need to be
> fixed.
>
>> .asc.sha1 files - This is also done by default. Looking through the
>> Maven
>> project in the central repo, I see the same thing. Is this
>> something that we
>> should be concerned with?
>
> That's not at all urgent.
Agree.
>
>
>> SOLVED
>>
>> License headers in test classes
>
> However there are still quite a few other source files that don't have
> headers, for example:
>
> maven-dotnet.iml
> maven-dotnet.ipr
These are generated by IDEA. I'm not sure why they are in SVN, but
they don't need licenses. They should be excluded from any source
distribution though.
>
> archetypes/maven-archetype-class-library/src/main/resources/
> archetype-resources/pom.xml
This is a template that will be used to generate another pom.xml, so
it shouldn't include the license as that'll appear in the output (and
the user may not want to license it as such)
Cheers,
Brett
--
Brett Porter
brett@apache.org
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
Re: Remaining Issues For NMaven Release
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On 19/02/2008, Shane Isbell <sh...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Based on feedback from the general incubator list, we have the following
> issues
>
> OUTSTANDING
> Copyright Name - Should the copyright contain ASF or Apache NMaven?
> According to Brett, it should be ASF, which also sounds right to me. Looking
> through the incubator project releases: cxf, tika, felix, I also see ASF.
The Notice file(s) in the jars should contain something like
Apache NMaven
Copyright 2006-2008 The Apache Software Foundation
(i.e. as per
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/nmaven/tags/maven-dotnet-parent-0.15-incubating/NOTICE.txt
)
*not*
maven-archetype-dotnet-class-library
Copyright 2006-2008 The Apache Software Foundation
IMO that does need to be fixed.
> Itemized Notice File - This is done by default. I'm not sure how to remove
> the itemization or whether this is necessary.
I think it's created by the remote resources plugin.
Just remove that and use the NOTICE file that is already in SVN.
Likewise, I think the existing NOTICE files in the jars need to be fixed.
> .asc.sha1 files - This is also done by default. Looking through the Maven
> project in the central repo, I see the same thing. Is this something that we
> should be concerned with?
That's not at all urgent.
> SOLVED
>
> License headers in test classes
However there are still quite a few other source files that don't have
headers, for example:
maven-dotnet.iml
maven-dotnet.ipr
archetypes/maven-archetype-class-library/src/main/resources/archetype-resources/pom.xml
The RAT report will show which ones don't have headers.
These need to be fixed please.
> Incorrect Start Date on Copyright
> Manifest entry to contain target and source versions
>
> Thanks,
> Shane