[Release] Javassist is OK for now (was: Fwd: Cliff's page on 3rd party policy)

[Alex Karasulu <ak...@apache.org>]

Yes!  We're OK to release M1.  We should definitely make sure we run RAT.

Alex

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org>
Date: Feb 15, 2008 6:36 PM
Subject: Re: Cliff's page on 3rd party policy
To: members@apache.org


On Feb 15, 2008 6:13 PM, Alex Karasulu <ak...@apache.org> wrote:
> Ok great - if there are no objections I'm going to forward this to a
project
> mailing list.

You are welcome to do so.

> Thanks,
> Alex
>
> On Feb 15, 2008 5:31 PM, Sam Ruby <ru...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 15, 2008 5:26 PM, Alex Karasulu <ak...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I was just looking at this page because folks on different PMCs have
> cited
> > > it as official ASF policy around 3rd party licensing:
> > >
> > >    http://people.apache.org/~cliffs/3party.html<http://people.apache.org/%7Ecliffs/3party.html>
> > >
> > > I thought this work or some subset of it was what the board is
currently
> > > reviewing to determine our official policy.  Hence all the mega
threads
> > > around it.
> >
> > Here is a (minor) update:
> >
> > http://people.apache.org/~rubys/3party.html<http://people.apache.org/%7Erubys/3party.html>
> >
> > > Am I wrong? Is this page our official policy right now?
> >
> > No, it isn't official just yet.
> >
> >
> > > Also if a project is preparing for a release and there's a transient
> > > dependency on an MPL licensed binary, then does the board recommend we
> wait
> > > until the policy is solidified before the next board meeting?
> >
> > Don't wait.
> >
> > - Sam Ruby

Re: [Release] Javassist is OK for now (was: Fwd: Cliff's page on 3rd party policy)

[Mike Heath <mh...@apache.org>]

Alex Karasulu wrote:
> Yes!  We're OK to release M1.  We should definitely make sure we run RAT.

Excellent!  I guess you can disregard the email I sent 5 minutes ago. :)

So I ran RAT and it threw an exception saying it had too many unknown
licenses.  Below the RAT output and I'm not sure what it means.  Does
anyone have any ideas?  I'll look into more this evening.

*****************************************************
Summary
-------
Notes: 2
Binaries: 0
Archives: 0
Standards: 6

Apache Licensed: 1
Generated Documents: 0

JavaDocs are generated and so license header is optional
Generated files do not required license headers

5 Unknown Licenses

*******************************

Archives (+ indicates readable, $ unreadable):


*****************************************************
  Files with AL headers will be marked L
  Binary files (which do not require AL headers) will be marked B
  Compressed archives will be marked A
  Notices, licenses etc will be marked N
 !????? LICENSE.jzlib.txt
  N     NOTICE.txt
 !????? release.xml
 !????? LICENSE.slf4j.txt
  N     LICENSE.txt
 !????? LICENSE.springframework.txt
  AL    pom.xml
 !????? LICENSE.ognl.txt