You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to commits@harmony.apache.org by "Sebb (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2009/05/01 19:40:30 UTC
[jira] Commented: (HARMONY-6155) NOTICE file does not have required
contents
[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-6155?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12705071#action_12705071 ]
Sebb commented on HARMONY-6155:
-------------------------------
I think there are still some tweaks to be made.
There seem to be some items missing from the NOTICE file - I would expect this to mention most, if not all, of the 3rd party items.
For example:
ICU4C
Copyright (c) 1995-2005 International Business Machines Corporation and others
All rights reserved.
[BTW, do you still use both versions of ICU4C?]
ZLIB version 1.2.3
(C) 1995-2004 Jean-loup Gailly and Mark Adler
etc.
But not Apache Yoko, and probably not necessary for the IETF RFCs
> NOTICE file does not have required contents
> -------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HARMONY-6155
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-6155
> Project: Harmony
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Website/Documentation
> Affects Versions: 5.0M9
> Reporter: Sebb
> Assignee: Tim Ellison
> Fix For: 5.0M10
>
>
> The NOTICE file does not have the contents as per:
> http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice
> The first 6 lines of the NOTICE should be replaced with the Apache product name and Copyright year(s).
> I'm not entirely sure what should be done with the COPYRIGHT and THIRD_PARTY_NOTICES.txt files, but their contents should probably be moved into the NOTICE or LICENSE files as appropriate.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
Re: [general] NOTICE file does not have required contents (HARMONY-6155)
Posted by Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>.
sebbaz@gmail.com wrote:
> Tim Ellison wrote:
>> Sebb commented on HARMONY-6155:
>>> I think there are still some tweaks to be made.
>>>
>>> There seem to be some items missing from the NOTICE file - I
>>> would expect this to mention most, if not all, of the 3rd party items.
>>> For example:
>>>
>>> ICU4C Copyright (c) 1995-2005 International Business Machines
>>> Corporation and others
>>> All rights reserved.
>>
>> What are the criteria you are applying to determine which third-party
>> items are put in the NOTICE file rather than the LICENSE file?
>
> http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice
That leaves plenty open to interpretation, and I'm genuinely not trying
to be awkward...
> "2. The remainder of the NOTICE file is to be used for required
> third-party notices."
>
>> If you take a look at the (canonical) example of httpd's NOTICE [1] and
>> LICENSE [2] you can see similar distinctions.
>>
>> [1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/NOTICE?view=co
>> [2] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/LICENSE?view=co
>
> Exactly, the NOTICE file contains the attributions, the LICENSE file
> contains the licenses.
Then we have a different definition of a required attribution.
Look at the httpd LICENSE ([2] above), scroll to the bottom and you'll
see a license "For the expat parser component".
It says,
"<blah, blah>
The above copyright notice and this permission notice shall be included
in all copies or substantial portions of the Software.
<blah, blah>"
Now look at the httpd NOTICE file ([1] above). See anything there
related to this?
> As far as I can tell, at least some of the Hrmony licenses require
> attribution.
Then either the policy needs clarifying or a number of projects need
bringing in-line with it. From what I understand, the NOTICE includes
notices that were in our source code.
Regards,
Tim
>>> [BTW, do you still use both versions of ICU4C?]
>>
>> No. Why do you ask? Are you confusing the ICU4C and ICU4J entries?
>
> Yes, sorry.
>
>>> ZLIB version 1.2.3
>>> (C) 1995-2004 Jean-loup Gailly and Mark Adler
>>>
>>> etc.
>>> But not Apache Yoko, and probably not necessary for the IETF RFCs
>>
>> Regards,
>> Tim
>>
>>
>
>
Re: [general] NOTICE file does not have required contents (HARMONY-6155)
Posted by se...@gmail.com.
Tim Ellison wrote:
> Sebb commented on HARMONY-6155:
>> I think there are still some tweaks to be made.
>>
>> There seem to be some items missing from the NOTICE file - I
>> would expect this to mention most, if not all, of the 3rd party items.
>> For example:
>>
>> ICU4C
>> Copyright (c) 1995-2005 International Business Machines Corporation and others
>> All rights reserved.
>
> What are the criteria you are applying to determine which third-party
> items are put in the NOTICE file rather than the LICENSE file?
http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#notice
"2. The remainder of the NOTICE file is to be used for required
third-party notices."
> If you take a look at the (canonical) example of httpd's NOTICE [1] and
> LICENSE [2] you can see similar distinctions.
>
> [1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/NOTICE?view=co
> [2] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/LICENSE?view=co
Exactly, the NOTICE file contains the attributions, the LICENSE file
contains the licenses.
As far as I can tell, at least some of the Hrmony licenses require
attribution.
>> [BTW, do you still use both versions of ICU4C?]
>
> No. Why do you ask? Are you confusing the ICU4C and ICU4J entries?
Yes, sorry.
>> ZLIB version 1.2.3
>> (C) 1995-2004 Jean-loup Gailly and Mark Adler
>>
>> etc.
>>
>> But not Apache Yoko, and probably not necessary for the IETF RFCs
>
> Regards,
> Tim
>
>
[general] NOTICE file does not have required contents (HARMONY-6155)
Posted by Tim Ellison <t....@gmail.com>.
Sebb commented on HARMONY-6155:
>
> I think there are still some tweaks to be made.
>
> There seem to be some items missing from the NOTICE file - I
> would expect this to mention most, if not all, of the 3rd party items.
> For example:
>
> ICU4C
> Copyright (c) 1995-2005 International Business Machines Corporation and others
> All rights reserved.
What are the criteria you are applying to determine which third-party
items are put in the NOTICE file rather than the LICENSE file?
If you take a look at the (canonical) example of httpd's NOTICE [1] and
LICENSE [2] you can see similar distinctions.
[1] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/NOTICE?view=co
[2] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/httpd/httpd/trunk/LICENSE?view=co
> [BTW, do you still use both versions of ICU4C?]
No. Why do you ask? Are you confusing the ICU4C and ICU4J entries?
> ZLIB version 1.2.3
> (C) 1995-2004 Jean-loup Gailly and Mark Adler
>
> etc.
>
> But not Apache Yoko, and probably not necessary for the IETF RFCs
Regards,
Tim