You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@royale.apache.org by Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> on 2017/12/04 00:36:59 UTC
PR18 - NOTICE file update
Gang,
as you are nearing release (great!), perhaps it is time to take a look at
Pull Request 18[1], which to me seems accurate.
[1] https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/pull/18
Cheers
--
Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
http://polygene.apache.org - New Energy for Java
Re: PR18 - NOTICE file update
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
Hi -
Two points.
(1) The PR has an extra copyright for the ASF added. This would need to be removed from the PR.
(2) The inclusion of the following:
The Initial Developer of the Original Code, known as Adobe Flex, is Adobe Systems Incorporated (http://www.adobe.com/).
Copyright 2003 - 2012 Adobe Systems Incorporated. All Rights Reserved.
This is debatable, It is debatable in both Flex and Royale. I think that the debate is more about the inclusive “The Initial Developer …”
Better language would be something like:
“Includes software developed and distributed as Adobe Flex.
Copyright 2003 - 2012 Adobe Systems Incorporated. All Rights Reserved.”
I have also added this commentary to the PR.
Regards,
Dave
> On Dec 4, 2017, at 1:16 AM, Harbs <ha...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I disagree. The wording is misleading and wrong and I don’t think anything needs to be propagated in this case.
>
> I did not close the PR because I wanted to leave it up to other PMC members to decide if I’m right or wrong. I’ll leave it other folks to decide if this is an issue.
>
> Harbs
>
>> On Dec 4, 2017, at 11:03 AM, Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
>>
>> I did point out it was an outstanding issue several week back and IMO needed to be addressed before a release was made.
>
Re: PR18 - NOTICE file update
Posted by Harbs <ha...@gmail.com>.
I disagree. The wording is misleading and wrong and I don’t think anything needs to be propagated in this case.
I did not close the PR because I wanted to leave it up to other PMC members to decide if I’m right or wrong. I’ll leave it other folks to decide if this is an issue.
Harbs
> On Dec 4, 2017, at 11:03 AM, Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
>
> I did point out it was an outstanding issue several week back and IMO needed to be addressed before a release was made.
Re: PR18 - NOTICE file update
Posted by Harbs <ha...@gmail.com>.
Sorry about that. I shouldn’t make assumptions.
Harbs
> On Dec 4, 2017, at 11:03 AM, Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
>
>> I assume Justin asked you to write this email.
>
> No I didn’t,
Re: PR18 - NOTICE file update
Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
Hi,
> I assume Justin asked you to write this email.
No I didn’t, I did point out it was an outstanding issue several week back and IMO needed to be addressed before a release was made.
> I’m not sure how well you read the PR, but I don’t believe it's accurate at all. The original code of Royale does not come from Adobe at all. Parts of it were adapted from Apache Flex which was in turn *donated* by Adobe to Apache.
The code in question comes from the Apache Flex project, it has a NOTICE file, you need to look at that NOTICE file and either apply all or it or preferably the relevant bits according to what you have bundled.
> We’re not bundling anything here, but if any link is applicable, it’s this one.[2]
Apache Flex code is being bundled here. This code [1] that was committed to Apache Royale comes from the Apache Flex project [2]. For instance search for "@productversion Flex 3” in that commit [2]. It was original donated by Adobe in a software grant (as it was part of the Flex 3 codebase) which you agree with above. That why those lines about Adobe are listed in the Apache Flex NOTICE file in the first place. The link you provided [3] states that Apache Flex NOTICE file [4] needs to looked at and and bits propagated to the Apache Royale NOTICE file. That IMO includes these lines:
The Initial Developer of the Original Code, known as Adobe Flex, is Adobe
Systems Incorporated (http://www.adobe.com/).
Copyright 2003 - 2012 Adobe Systems Incorporated. All Rights Reserved.
As that is the case here. You could also possibly point out in the NOTICE file which files come via this route to make it clearer but that may be a long list when looking at the compiler code and I’ve not seen other project do this. However usually other projects code goes in a directory called 3rd party or similar to make it clear where it come from.
The copyright ASF line only needs to be included once.
Thanks,
Justin
1. https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/commit/5be4088ac497a28e97ca886908b4b485082ee5b5
2. https://github.com/apache/flex-sdk/tree/develop/frameworks/projects/framework/src/mx/validators
3. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#bundle-asf-product
4. https://github.com/apache/flex-sdk/blob/develop/NOTICE
Re: PR18 - NOTICE file update
Posted by Harbs <ha...@gmail.com>.
Hi Niclas,
I assume Justin asked you to write this email.
I’m not sure how well you read the PR, but I don’t believe it's accurate at all. The original code of Royale does not come from Adobe at all. Parts of it were adapted from Apache Flex which was in turn *donated* by Adobe to Apache.
We’re not bundling anything here, but if any link is applicable, it’s this one.[2]
Thanks,
Harbs
[2]http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#bundle-asf-product <http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#bundle-asf-product>
> On Dec 4, 2017, at 2:36 AM, Niclas Hedhman <ni...@hedhman.org> wrote:
>
> Gang,
> as you are nearing release (great!), perhaps it is time to take a look at
> Pull Request 18[1], which to me seems accurate.
>
>
> [1] https://github.com/apache/royale-asjs/pull/18
>
> Cheers
> --
> Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer
> http://polygene.apache.org - New Energy for Java
Re: PR18 - NOTICE file update
Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
Hi,
BTW the principle at play here is that you need to propagate content from another projects NOTICE file if it’’s Apache licensed. [1]
There is also one other licensing issue that I’m aware of and that's regarding the bundling of FlatUI code. The FlatUI project has recently added MIT license text and headers and we need to comply with the terms of that license by including them. If no one deals with this I will create a PR for it.
Thanks,
Justin
1. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#bundle-asf-product