You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@netbeans.apache.org by Matthias Bläsing <mb...@doppel-helix.eu> on 2018/01/28 16:53:15 UTC
[Mentors] Re: License handling (was: Re: Ready to vote on Apache
NetBeans (incubating) 9.0 Beta RC3?)
Hey Mentors and all other interested,
I'd like you to have a look at the work done in PR-396:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396
This adds an optional file "licenseinfo.xml" that is placed into each
module directory. This file can address multiple filesets and for each
set of files the information:
* license (reference to one of the standard licenses)
* license info (free text further clarifying the license, for example
the requirement to spell out copyrights)
* commenttype (if there is a generic reason for the explicit
licenseinfo)
* comment (free text to further give reason)
* sourceOnly -> boolean and if present indicates, that these files
don't end up in the binary build (and thus should not be present in
the license info)
Sample 1 - files distributed in the binary, various licenses:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396/commits/896c8e082f33c6dd03e3c9d39bd3ae5470c9ef60#diff-0dadd3d7a90ed77f9999bb61216fad06
Sample 2 - files only used at build-time and not present in binary:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396/commits/896c8e082f33c6dd03e3c9d39bd3ae5470c9ef60#diff-914c0a18bdf2e283ebf756d05fc424ac
From these licenseinfo.xml files:
* additional information for LICENSE is pulled (see attached samples,
names adjusted to clarify the distribution)
* license references are verified to be present
* an exclusion list for the rat report is build (they would fail it
anyway) and
* to document this a `nbbuild/build/rat-licenseinfo.txt` file is
created that hold the license information and comments
The base work is contained in this commit:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396/commits/9639164894234623aede1a8d2f611a7571a4838f
Based on this I added the information for various files in the followup
commits (in that process also adding license info where possible and
removing files, that are not needed).
Does this sound like a reasonable way forward?
Greetings,
Matthias
Am Samstag, den 27.01.2018, 22:11 +0100 schrieb Matthias Bläsing:
> Hi Jan,
>
> Am Samstag, den 27.01.2018, 17:21 +0100 schrieb Jan Lahoda:
> > On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 3:20 PM, Matthias Bläsing <mblaesing@doppel
> > -helix.eu
> > > wrote:
> > > Hi Jan,
> > >
> > > Am Samstag, den 27.01.2018, 15:12 +0100 schrieb Jan Lahoda:
> > > >
> > > > Does this relate only to things we have in source, or also to
> > > > external
> > > > binaries?
> > >
> > > I'm only looking into the files in the repository. I'm touching
> > > the
> > > CreateLicenseSummary and VerifyLibsAndLicenses tasks for this.
> > >
> >
> > Cool. For the maven (and probably a few more similar jars), I so
> > far also
> > have a tweak for CreateLicenseSummary:
> > ---
> > diff --git
> > a/nbbuild/antsrc/org/netbeans/nbbuild/extlibs/CreateLicenseSummary.
> > java
> > b/nbbuild/antsrc/org/netbeans/nbbuild/extlibs/CreateLicenseSummary.
> > java
> > index da4f169..b4cef9b 100644
> > ---
> > a/nbbuild/antsrc/org/netbeans/nbbuild/extlibs/CreateLicenseSummary.
> > java
> > +++
> > b/nbbuild/antsrc/org/netbeans/nbbuild/extlibs/CreateLicenseSummary.
> > java
> > @@ -253,9 +253,11 @@ public class CreateLicenseSummary extends Task
> > {
> > if (!innerName.endsWith(".jar") &&
> > !innerName.endsWith(".zip")) {
> > continue;
> > }
> > + Map<String, String> nestedHeaders =
> > binary2License.get(n + "!/" + innerName);
> > + if (nestedHeaders == null)
> > nestedHeaders = headers;
> > is = zf.getInputStream(entry);
> > try {
> > - crc2LicenseHeaders.put(computeCRC3
> > 2(is), headers);
> > + crc2LicenseHeaders.put(computeCRC3
> > 2(is), nestedHeaders);
> > } finally {
> > is.close();
> > }
> > ---
> >
> > Would that fit into what you are doing? (The intent is basically to
> > allow
> > the -license.txt files to say something like:
> > Files: apache-maven-3.3.9-bin.zip!/apache-maven-3.3.9/lib/jsr250-
> > api-1.0.jar
> >
> > to refer to a file that is inside an external binary zip/jar.
> >
>
> If I'm not mistaken, the syntax you are using is the way nested
> resources are addressed in the java API. Sounds good and sensible to
> me.
>
> Your work may conflict with my changes on the source level (I did
> some
> rearranging), but should not conflict with the general changes.
>
> I think I got the changeset into a workable state and pushed it to
> github:
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396
>
> This is not the complete solution, but from my perspective should
> give
> us a solid start.
>
>
> Greetings
>
> Matthias
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@netbeans.incubator.apache.o
> rg
>
> For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
>
>
>
Re: [Mentors] Re: License handling (was: Re: Ready to vote on Apache
NetBeans (incubating) 9.0 Beta RC3?)
Posted by John Kostaras <jk...@gmail.com>.
I apologize if this has been discussed before, but what needs to be done
for external libraries that are being used by NB and have other licenses?
E.g. o.eclipse.jgit is an external library from eclipse that has the *Eclipse
Distribution License*, too. Is this OK?
On 29 January 2018 at 20:51, Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I think this patch is important as it fixes some of the root problems for
> the -1 vote. I personally don't think it is a huge problem if we fix
> something that could be fixed later, as we will need to clear everything at
> some point anyway.
>
> FWIW, I'll have two patches based on this Matthias' one, for adding
> LICENSE&NOTICE to most (our) jars, and to put correct licences for some
> jars in Apache Maven distribution:
> https://github.com/jlahoda/incubator-netbeans/commit/
> d9d52d61dc10237d9c363a80485146f75ddcfbc5
> https://github.com/jlahoda/incubator-netbeans/commit/
> 9271831473f146c2107d22839acdfc97a183cdff
>
> I'll do my best to look at Matthias' patch again tonight.
>
> Thanks to Matthias for this work,
> Jan
>
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 8:22 PM, Matthias Bläsing <
> mblaesing@doppel-helix.eu
> > wrote:
>
> > Hi Geertjan,
> >
> > Am Sonntag, den 28.01.2018, 23:26 +0100 schrieb Geertjan Wielenga:
> > > Also, if we were to merge this code, would it mean we would have to
> > > restructure the rat exclusions from scratch or would it be possible
> > > to do incrementally?
> >
> > Both approaches, per module licenseinfo.xml and global rat-excludes.txt
> > can coexist.
> >
> > This commit demonstrates this approach, where I move the information
> > out of rat-excludes.txt into individual licenseinfo.xml files:
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396/commits/
> > 49524f125884d0e5c2bec5ee249c1f4f6efae922
> >
> > > How complete and ready is it to be merged?
> >
> > I pushed a minor update and consider it ready. This should only be
> > merged if the "licenseinfo.xml" file approach is agreed upon.
> >
> > >
> > > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 10:33 PM, Geertjan Wielenga
> > > <ge...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > > > We need to be careful that we don't try to do everything at once.
> > > > There will be several releases within the incubator and no one is
> > > > telling us or expecting us to solve all issues for Beta to be
> > > > released.
> > > >
> > > > Explicitly, only the first table, i.e., 1 - 4 in the below are
> > > > requirements for the Beta release, i.e., for rc3:
> > > >
> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/
> > Apache+NetBeans+9.0+Beta+rc3
> > > >
> > > > I am concerned that if we try to fix everything, which no one is
> > > > asking us to do, for the Beta release, we'll take longer than we
> need.
> > > >
> >
> > Point 4 needs comments for reviewers and info in license for EPL + EDL
> > + W3C license, so the above work is focused. I also addressed NETBEANS-
> > 315 and NETBEANS-314 because they illustrate my approach to solving the
> > problem.
> >
> > Parts of NETBEANS-317 were addressed because I did not feel comfortable
> > with a LICENSE file with a length >> 2000 lines.
> >
> > I hope that clears it up a bit.
> >
> > I'm online in the slack #general channel for netbeans, that might speed
> > up a discussion.
> >
> > Greetings
> >
> > Matthias
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
> >
> > For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
Re: [Mentors] Re: License handling (was: Re: Ready to vote on Apache
NetBeans (incubating) 9.0 Beta RC3?)
Posted by Jan Lahoda <la...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
I think this patch is important as it fixes some of the root problems for
the -1 vote. I personally don't think it is a huge problem if we fix
something that could be fixed later, as we will need to clear everything at
some point anyway.
FWIW, I'll have two patches based on this Matthias' one, for adding
LICENSE&NOTICE to most (our) jars, and to put correct licences for some
jars in Apache Maven distribution:
https://github.com/jlahoda/incubator-netbeans/commit/d9d52d61dc10237d9c363a80485146f75ddcfbc5
https://github.com/jlahoda/incubator-netbeans/commit/9271831473f146c2107d22839acdfc97a183cdff
I'll do my best to look at Matthias' patch again tonight.
Thanks to Matthias for this work,
Jan
On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 8:22 PM, Matthias Bläsing <mblaesing@doppel-helix.eu
> wrote:
> Hi Geertjan,
>
> Am Sonntag, den 28.01.2018, 23:26 +0100 schrieb Geertjan Wielenga:
> > Also, if we were to merge this code, would it mean we would have to
> > restructure the rat exclusions from scratch or would it be possible
> > to do incrementally?
>
> Both approaches, per module licenseinfo.xml and global rat-excludes.txt
> can coexist.
>
> This commit demonstrates this approach, where I move the information
> out of rat-excludes.txt into individual licenseinfo.xml files:
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396/commits/
> 49524f125884d0e5c2bec5ee249c1f4f6efae922
>
> > How complete and ready is it to be merged?
>
> I pushed a minor update and consider it ready. This should only be
> merged if the "licenseinfo.xml" file approach is agreed upon.
>
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 10:33 PM, Geertjan Wielenga
> > <ge...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > > We need to be careful that we don't try to do everything at once.
> > > There will be several releases within the incubator and no one is
> > > telling us or expecting us to solve all issues for Beta to be
> > > released.
> > >
> > > Explicitly, only the first table, i.e., 1 - 4 in the below are
> > > requirements for the Beta release, i.e., for rc3:
> > >
> > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/
> Apache+NetBeans+9.0+Beta+rc3
> > >
> > > I am concerned that if we try to fix everything, which no one is
> > > asking us to do, for the Beta release, we'll take longer than we need.
> > >
>
> Point 4 needs comments for reviewers and info in license for EPL + EDL
> + W3C license, so the above work is focused. I also addressed NETBEANS-
> 315 and NETBEANS-314 because they illustrate my approach to solving the
> problem.
>
> Parts of NETBEANS-317 were addressed because I did not feel comfortable
> with a LICENSE file with a length >> 2000 lines.
>
> I hope that clears it up a bit.
>
> I'm online in the slack #general channel for netbeans, that might speed
> up a discussion.
>
> Greetings
>
> Matthias
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
>
> For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
>
>
>
>
Re: [Mentors] Re: License handling (was: Re: Ready to vote on
Apache NetBeans (incubating) 9.0 Beta RC3?)
Posted by Matthias Bläsing <mb...@doppel-helix.eu>.
Hi Geertjan,
Am Sonntag, den 28.01.2018, 23:26 +0100 schrieb Geertjan Wielenga:
> Also, if we were to merge this code, would it mean we would have to
> restructure the rat exclusions from scratch or would it be possible
> to do incrementally?
Both approaches, per module licenseinfo.xml and global rat-excludes.txt
can coexist.
This commit demonstrates this approach, where I move the information
out of rat-excludes.txt into individual licenseinfo.xml files:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396/commits/49524f125884d0e5c2bec5ee249c1f4f6efae922
> How complete and ready is it to be merged?
I pushed a minor update and consider it ready. This should only be
merged if the "licenseinfo.xml" file approach is agreed upon.
>
> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 10:33 PM, Geertjan Wielenga
> <ge...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > We need to be careful that we don't try to do everything at once.
> > There will be several releases within the incubator and no one is
> > telling us or expecting us to solve all issues for Beta to be
> > released.
> >
> > Explicitly, only the first table, i.e., 1 - 4 in the below are
> > requirements for the Beta release, i.e., for rc3:
> >
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Apache+NetBeans+9.0+Beta+rc3
> >
> > I am concerned that if we try to fix everything, which no one is
> > asking us to do, for the Beta release, we'll take longer than we need.
> >
Point 4 needs comments for reviewers and info in license for EPL + EDL
+ W3C license, so the above work is focused. I also addressed NETBEANS-
315 and NETBEANS-314 because they illustrate my approach to solving the
problem.
Parts of NETBEANS-317 were addressed because I did not feel comfortable
with a LICENSE file with a length >> 2000 lines.
I hope that clears it up a bit.
I'm online in the slack #general channel for netbeans, that might speed
up a discussion.
Greetings
Matthias
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
Re: [Mentors] Re: License handling (was: Re: Ready to vote on Apache
NetBeans (incubating) 9.0 Beta RC3?)
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
Also, if we were to merge this code, would it mean we would have to
restructure the rat exclusions from scratch or would it be possible to
do incrementally?
How complete and ready is it to be merged?
Thanks,
Gj
On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 10:33 PM, Geertjan Wielenga
<ge...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> We need to be careful that we don't try to do everything at once.
> There will be several releases within the incubator and no one is
> telling us or expecting us to solve all issues for Beta to be
> released.
>
> Explicitly, only the first table, i.e., 1 - 4 in the below are
> requirements for the Beta release, i.e., for rc3:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Apache+NetBeans+9.0+Beta+rc3
>
> I am concerned that if we try to fix everything, which no one is
> asking us to do, for the Beta release, we'll take longer than we need.
>
> In any case, if we want to do more for the Beta release than those 4
> rows in the table above, we need to be very explicit about what it is
> that we are trying to achieve, i.e., at what specific point should rc3
> be voted on?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Gj
>
> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 10:25 PM, Matthias Bläsing
> <mb...@doppel-helix.eu> wrote:
>> Hey Geertjan,
>>
>> Am Sonntag, den 28.01.2018, 22:06 +0100 schrieb Geertjan Wielenga:
>>>
>>> Two questions from me to begin to understand this:
>>>
>>> 1. How does your work relate to this file, i.e., does it replace the
>>> file now or later or not at all:
>>>
>>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/blob/master/nbbuild/rat-
>>> exclusions.txt
>>
>> At this time it partly replaces the exclusions. It moves the
>> information from the global file to local files in the individual
>> modules.
>>
>> This is relevant, as for example the EDL requires adding the copyright
>> information for the files. This is covered by the "license" tag in the
>> licenseinfo.xml file and the ref attribute of the license tag.
>>
>> The exclusions "just exclude" a file, but don't give context/license
>> info, that is replace by my file.
>>
>> The context is also made clear to reviewers, as the "rat-
>> licenseinfo.txt" summarizes the data.
>>
>>
>>> 2. Is what you have done needed for rc3 or is it relevant for after
>>> rc3:
>>>
>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Apache+NetBeans+
>>> 9.0+Beta+rc3
>>
>> It was made clear, that missing license info was the reason for the -1.
>> Id did not take part in that discussion, so I can't decide, but I
>> looked through the commits after RC2 and did not see to much license
>> work. Jan indicated also, that he has changes prepared.
>>
>> My takeaway from the discussion is this: We should get the rat
>> exclusions down and license info fixed. I would not go for a RC3 at
>> this point.
>>
>> Greetings
>>
>> Matthias
>>
>>>
>>> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Matthias Bläsing
>>> <mb...@doppel-helix.eu> wrote:
>>> > Hey Mentors and all other interested,
>>> >
>>> > I'd like you to have a look at the work done in PR-396:
>>> >
>>> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396
>>> >
>>> > This adds an optional file "licenseinfo.xml" that is placed into
>>> > each
>>> > module directory. This file can address multiple filesets and for
>>> > each
>>> > set of files the information:
>>> >
>>> > * license (reference to one of the standard licenses)
>>> > * license info (free text further clarifying the license, for
>>> > example
>>> > the requirement to spell out copyrights)
>>> > * commenttype (if there is a generic reason for the explicit
>>> > licenseinfo)
>>> > * comment (free text to further give reason)
>>> > * sourceOnly -> boolean and if present indicates, that these files
>>> > don't end up in the binary build (and thus should not be present
>>> > in
>>> > the license info)
>>> >
>>> > Sample 1 - files distributed in the binary, various licenses:
>>> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396/commits/896c8
>>> > e082f33c6dd03e3c9d39bd3ae5470c9ef60#diff-
>>> > 0dadd3d7a90ed77f9999bb61216fad06
>>> >
>>> > Sample 2 - files only used at build-time and not present in binary:
>>> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396/commits/896c8
>>> > e082f33c6dd03e3c9d39bd3ae5470c9ef60#diff-
>>> > 914c0a18bdf2e283ebf756d05fc424ac
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > From these licenseinfo.xml files:
>>> >
>>> > * additional information for LICENSE is pulled (see attached
>>> > samples,
>>> > names adjusted to clarify the distribution)
>>> > * license references are verified to be present
>>> > * an exclusion list for the rat report is build (they would fail
>>> > it
>>> > anyway) and
>>> > * to document this a `nbbuild/build/rat-licenseinfo.txt` file is
>>> > created that hold the license information and comments
>>> >
>>> > The base work is contained in this commit:
>>> >
>>> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396/commits/96391
>>> > 64894234623aede1a8d2f611a7571a4838f
>>> >
>>> > Based on this I added the information for various files in the
>>> > followup
>>> > commits (in that process also adding license info where possible
>>> > and
>>> > removing files, that are not needed).
>>> >
>>> > Does this sound like a reasonable way forward?
>>> >
>>> > Greetings,
>>> >
>>> > Matthias
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > Am Samstag, den 27.01.2018, 22:11 +0100 schrieb Matthias Bläsing:
>>> > > Hi Jan,
>>> > >
>>> > > Am Samstag, den 27.01.2018, 17:21 +0100 schrieb Jan Lahoda:
>>> > > > On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 3:20 PM, Matthias Bläsing <mblaesing@doppel
>>> > > > -helix.eu
>>> > > > > wrote:
>>> > > > > Hi Jan,
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > Am Samstag, den 27.01.2018, 15:12 +0100 schrieb Jan Lahoda:
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > > > Does this relate only to things we have in source, or also to
>>> > > > > > external
>>> > > > > > binaries?
>>> > > > >
>>> > > > > I'm only looking into the files in the repository. I'm touching
>>> > > > > the
>>> > > > > CreateLicenseSummary and VerifyLibsAndLicenses tasks for this.
>>> > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Cool. For the maven (and probably a few more similar jars), I so
>>> > > > far also
>>> > > > have a tweak for CreateLicenseSummary:
>>> > > > ---
>>> > > > diff --git
>>> > > > a/nbbuild/antsrc/org/netbeans/nbbuild/extlibs/CreateLicenseSummary.
>>> > > > java
>>> > > > b/nbbuild/antsrc/org/netbeans/nbbuild/extlibs/CreateLicenseSummary.
>>> > > > java
>>> > > > index da4f169..b4cef9b 100644
>>> > > > ---
>>> > > > a/nbbuild/antsrc/org/netbeans/nbbuild/extlibs/CreateLicenseSummary.
>>> > > > java
>>> > > > +++
>>> > > > b/nbbuild/antsrc/org/netbeans/nbbuild/extlibs/CreateLicenseSummary.
>>> > > > java
>>> > > > @@ -253,9 +253,11 @@ public class CreateLicenseSummary extends Task
>>> > > > {
>>> > > > if (!innerName.endsWith(".jar") &&
>>> > > > !innerName.endsWith(".zip")) {
>>> > > > continue;
>>> > > > }
>>> > > > + Map<String, String> nestedHeaders =
>>> > > > binary2License.get(n + "!/" + innerName);
>>> > > > + if (nestedHeaders == null)
>>> > > > nestedHeaders = headers;
>>> > > > is = zf.getInputStream(entry);
>>> > > > try {
>>> > > > - crc2LicenseHeaders.put(computeCRC3
>>> > > > 2(is), headers);
>>> > > > + crc2LicenseHeaders.put(computeCRC3
>>> > > > 2(is), nestedHeaders);
>>> > > > } finally {
>>> > > > is.close();
>>> > > > }
>>> > > > ---
>>> > > >
>>> > > > Would that fit into what you are doing? (The intent is basically to
>>> > > > allow
>>> > > > the -license.txt files to say something like:
>>> > > > Files: apache-maven-3.3.9-bin.zip!/apache-maven-3.3.9/lib/jsr250-
>>> > > > api-1.0.jar
>>> > > >
>>> > > > to refer to a file that is inside an external binary zip/jar.
>>> > > >
>>> > >
>>> > > If I'm not mistaken, the syntax you are using is the way nested
>>> > > resources are addressed in the java API. Sounds good and sensible to
>>> > > me.
>>> > >
>>> > > Your work may conflict with my changes on the source level (I did
>>> > > some
>>> > > rearranging), but should not conflict with the general changes.
>>> > >
>>> > > I think I got the changeset into a workable state and pushed it to
>>> > > github:
>>> > >
>>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396
>>> > >
>>> > > This is not the complete solution, but from my perspective should
>>> > > give
>>> > > us a solid start.
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
>>
>> For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
>>
>>
>>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
Re: [Mentors] Re: License handling (was: Re: Ready to vote on Apache
NetBeans (incubating) 9.0 Beta RC3?)
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
We need to be careful that we don't try to do everything at once.
There will be several releases within the incubator and no one is
telling us or expecting us to solve all issues for Beta to be
released.
Explicitly, only the first table, i.e., 1 - 4 in the below are
requirements for the Beta release, i.e., for rc3:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Apache+NetBeans+9.0+Beta+rc3
I am concerned that if we try to fix everything, which no one is
asking us to do, for the Beta release, we'll take longer than we need.
In any case, if we want to do more for the Beta release than those 4
rows in the table above, we need to be very explicit about what it is
that we are trying to achieve, i.e., at what specific point should rc3
be voted on?
Thanks,
Gj
On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 10:25 PM, Matthias Bläsing
<mb...@doppel-helix.eu> wrote:
> Hey Geertjan,
>
> Am Sonntag, den 28.01.2018, 22:06 +0100 schrieb Geertjan Wielenga:
>>
>> Two questions from me to begin to understand this:
>>
>> 1. How does your work relate to this file, i.e., does it replace the
>> file now or later or not at all:
>>
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/blob/master/nbbuild/rat-
>> exclusions.txt
>
> At this time it partly replaces the exclusions. It moves the
> information from the global file to local files in the individual
> modules.
>
> This is relevant, as for example the EDL requires adding the copyright
> information for the files. This is covered by the "license" tag in the
> licenseinfo.xml file and the ref attribute of the license tag.
>
> The exclusions "just exclude" a file, but don't give context/license
> info, that is replace by my file.
>
> The context is also made clear to reviewers, as the "rat-
> licenseinfo.txt" summarizes the data.
>
>
>> 2. Is what you have done needed for rc3 or is it relevant for after
>> rc3:
>>
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Apache+NetBeans+
>> 9.0+Beta+rc3
>
> It was made clear, that missing license info was the reason for the -1.
> Id did not take part in that discussion, so I can't decide, but I
> looked through the commits after RC2 and did not see to much license
> work. Jan indicated also, that he has changes prepared.
>
> My takeaway from the discussion is this: We should get the rat
> exclusions down and license info fixed. I would not go for a RC3 at
> this point.
>
> Greetings
>
> Matthias
>
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Matthias Bläsing
>> <mb...@doppel-helix.eu> wrote:
>> > Hey Mentors and all other interested,
>> >
>> > I'd like you to have a look at the work done in PR-396:
>> >
>> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396
>> >
>> > This adds an optional file "licenseinfo.xml" that is placed into
>> > each
>> > module directory. This file can address multiple filesets and for
>> > each
>> > set of files the information:
>> >
>> > * license (reference to one of the standard licenses)
>> > * license info (free text further clarifying the license, for
>> > example
>> > the requirement to spell out copyrights)
>> > * commenttype (if there is a generic reason for the explicit
>> > licenseinfo)
>> > * comment (free text to further give reason)
>> > * sourceOnly -> boolean and if present indicates, that these files
>> > don't end up in the binary build (and thus should not be present
>> > in
>> > the license info)
>> >
>> > Sample 1 - files distributed in the binary, various licenses:
>> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396/commits/896c8
>> > e082f33c6dd03e3c9d39bd3ae5470c9ef60#diff-
>> > 0dadd3d7a90ed77f9999bb61216fad06
>> >
>> > Sample 2 - files only used at build-time and not present in binary:
>> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396/commits/896c8
>> > e082f33c6dd03e3c9d39bd3ae5470c9ef60#diff-
>> > 914c0a18bdf2e283ebf756d05fc424ac
>> >
>> >
>> > From these licenseinfo.xml files:
>> >
>> > * additional information for LICENSE is pulled (see attached
>> > samples,
>> > names adjusted to clarify the distribution)
>> > * license references are verified to be present
>> > * an exclusion list for the rat report is build (they would fail
>> > it
>> > anyway) and
>> > * to document this a `nbbuild/build/rat-licenseinfo.txt` file is
>> > created that hold the license information and comments
>> >
>> > The base work is contained in this commit:
>> >
>> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396/commits/96391
>> > 64894234623aede1a8d2f611a7571a4838f
>> >
>> > Based on this I added the information for various files in the
>> > followup
>> > commits (in that process also adding license info where possible
>> > and
>> > removing files, that are not needed).
>> >
>> > Does this sound like a reasonable way forward?
>> >
>> > Greetings,
>> >
>> > Matthias
>> >
>> >
>> > Am Samstag, den 27.01.2018, 22:11 +0100 schrieb Matthias Bläsing:
>> > > Hi Jan,
>> > >
>> > > Am Samstag, den 27.01.2018, 17:21 +0100 schrieb Jan Lahoda:
>> > > > On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 3:20 PM, Matthias Bläsing <mblaesing@doppel
>> > > > -helix.eu
>> > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > Hi Jan,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Am Samstag, den 27.01.2018, 15:12 +0100 schrieb Jan Lahoda:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Does this relate only to things we have in source, or also to
>> > > > > > external
>> > > > > > binaries?
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I'm only looking into the files in the repository. I'm touching
>> > > > > the
>> > > > > CreateLicenseSummary and VerifyLibsAndLicenses tasks for this.
>> > > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > Cool. For the maven (and probably a few more similar jars), I so
>> > > > far also
>> > > > have a tweak for CreateLicenseSummary:
>> > > > ---
>> > > > diff --git
>> > > > a/nbbuild/antsrc/org/netbeans/nbbuild/extlibs/CreateLicenseSummary.
>> > > > java
>> > > > b/nbbuild/antsrc/org/netbeans/nbbuild/extlibs/CreateLicenseSummary.
>> > > > java
>> > > > index da4f169..b4cef9b 100644
>> > > > ---
>> > > > a/nbbuild/antsrc/org/netbeans/nbbuild/extlibs/CreateLicenseSummary.
>> > > > java
>> > > > +++
>> > > > b/nbbuild/antsrc/org/netbeans/nbbuild/extlibs/CreateLicenseSummary.
>> > > > java
>> > > > @@ -253,9 +253,11 @@ public class CreateLicenseSummary extends Task
>> > > > {
>> > > > if (!innerName.endsWith(".jar") &&
>> > > > !innerName.endsWith(".zip")) {
>> > > > continue;
>> > > > }
>> > > > + Map<String, String> nestedHeaders =
>> > > > binary2License.get(n + "!/" + innerName);
>> > > > + if (nestedHeaders == null)
>> > > > nestedHeaders = headers;
>> > > > is = zf.getInputStream(entry);
>> > > > try {
>> > > > - crc2LicenseHeaders.put(computeCRC3
>> > > > 2(is), headers);
>> > > > + crc2LicenseHeaders.put(computeCRC3
>> > > > 2(is), nestedHeaders);
>> > > > } finally {
>> > > > is.close();
>> > > > }
>> > > > ---
>> > > >
>> > > > Would that fit into what you are doing? (The intent is basically to
>> > > > allow
>> > > > the -license.txt files to say something like:
>> > > > Files: apache-maven-3.3.9-bin.zip!/apache-maven-3.3.9/lib/jsr250-
>> > > > api-1.0.jar
>> > > >
>> > > > to refer to a file that is inside an external binary zip/jar.
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > If I'm not mistaken, the syntax you are using is the way nested
>> > > resources are addressed in the java API. Sounds good and sensible to
>> > > me.
>> > >
>> > > Your work may conflict with my changes on the source level (I did
>> > > some
>> > > rearranging), but should not conflict with the general changes.
>> > >
>> > > I think I got the changeset into a workable state and pushed it to
>> > > github:
>> > >
>> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396
>> > >
>> > > This is not the complete solution, but from my perspective should
>> > > give
>> > > us a solid start.
>> > >
>> > >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
>
> For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
Re: [Mentors] Re: License handling (was: Re: Ready to vote on
Apache NetBeans (incubating) 9.0 Beta RC3?)
Posted by Matthias Bläsing <mb...@doppel-helix.eu>.
Hey Geertjan,
Am Sonntag, den 28.01.2018, 22:06 +0100 schrieb Geertjan Wielenga:
>
> Two questions from me to begin to understand this:
>
> 1. How does your work relate to this file, i.e., does it replace the
> file now or later or not at all:
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/blob/master/nbbuild/rat-
> exclusions.txt
At this time it partly replaces the exclusions. It moves the
information from the global file to local files in the individual
modules.
This is relevant, as for example the EDL requires adding the copyright
information for the files. This is covered by the "license" tag in the
licenseinfo.xml file and the ref attribute of the license tag.
The exclusions "just exclude" a file, but don't give context/license
info, that is replace by my file.
The context is also made clear to reviewers, as the "rat-
licenseinfo.txt" summarizes the data.
> 2. Is what you have done needed for rc3 or is it relevant for after
> rc3:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Apache+NetBeans+
> 9.0+Beta+rc3
It was made clear, that missing license info was the reason for the -1.
Id did not take part in that discussion, so I can't decide, but I
looked through the commits after RC2 and did not see to much license
work. Jan indicated also, that he has changes prepared.
My takeaway from the discussion is this: We should get the rat
exclusions down and license info fixed. I would not go for a RC3 at
this point.
Greetings
Matthias
>
> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Matthias Bläsing
> <mb...@doppel-helix.eu> wrote:
> > Hey Mentors and all other interested,
> >
> > I'd like you to have a look at the work done in PR-396:
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396
> >
> > This adds an optional file "licenseinfo.xml" that is placed into
> > each
> > module directory. This file can address multiple filesets and for
> > each
> > set of files the information:
> >
> > * license (reference to one of the standard licenses)
> > * license info (free text further clarifying the license, for
> > example
> > the requirement to spell out copyrights)
> > * commenttype (if there is a generic reason for the explicit
> > licenseinfo)
> > * comment (free text to further give reason)
> > * sourceOnly -> boolean and if present indicates, that these files
> > don't end up in the binary build (and thus should not be present
> > in
> > the license info)
> >
> > Sample 1 - files distributed in the binary, various licenses:
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396/commits/896c8
> > e082f33c6dd03e3c9d39bd3ae5470c9ef60#diff-
> > 0dadd3d7a90ed77f9999bb61216fad06
> >
> > Sample 2 - files only used at build-time and not present in binary:
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396/commits/896c8
> > e082f33c6dd03e3c9d39bd3ae5470c9ef60#diff-
> > 914c0a18bdf2e283ebf756d05fc424ac
> >
> >
> > From these licenseinfo.xml files:
> >
> > * additional information for LICENSE is pulled (see attached
> > samples,
> > names adjusted to clarify the distribution)
> > * license references are verified to be present
> > * an exclusion list for the rat report is build (they would fail
> > it
> > anyway) and
> > * to document this a `nbbuild/build/rat-licenseinfo.txt` file is
> > created that hold the license information and comments
> >
> > The base work is contained in this commit:
> >
> > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396/commits/96391
> > 64894234623aede1a8d2f611a7571a4838f
> >
> > Based on this I added the information for various files in the
> > followup
> > commits (in that process also adding license info where possible
> > and
> > removing files, that are not needed).
> >
> > Does this sound like a reasonable way forward?
> >
> > Greetings,
> >
> > Matthias
> >
> >
> > Am Samstag, den 27.01.2018, 22:11 +0100 schrieb Matthias Bläsing:
> > > Hi Jan,
> > >
> > > Am Samstag, den 27.01.2018, 17:21 +0100 schrieb Jan Lahoda:
> > > > On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 3:20 PM, Matthias Bläsing <mblaesing@doppel
> > > > -helix.eu
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > Hi Jan,
> > > > >
> > > > > Am Samstag, den 27.01.2018, 15:12 +0100 schrieb Jan Lahoda:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Does this relate only to things we have in source, or also to
> > > > > > external
> > > > > > binaries?
> > > > >
> > > > > I'm only looking into the files in the repository. I'm touching
> > > > > the
> > > > > CreateLicenseSummary and VerifyLibsAndLicenses tasks for this.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Cool. For the maven (and probably a few more similar jars), I so
> > > > far also
> > > > have a tweak for CreateLicenseSummary:
> > > > ---
> > > > diff --git
> > > > a/nbbuild/antsrc/org/netbeans/nbbuild/extlibs/CreateLicenseSummary.
> > > > java
> > > > b/nbbuild/antsrc/org/netbeans/nbbuild/extlibs/CreateLicenseSummary.
> > > > java
> > > > index da4f169..b4cef9b 100644
> > > > ---
> > > > a/nbbuild/antsrc/org/netbeans/nbbuild/extlibs/CreateLicenseSummary.
> > > > java
> > > > +++
> > > > b/nbbuild/antsrc/org/netbeans/nbbuild/extlibs/CreateLicenseSummary.
> > > > java
> > > > @@ -253,9 +253,11 @@ public class CreateLicenseSummary extends Task
> > > > {
> > > > if (!innerName.endsWith(".jar") &&
> > > > !innerName.endsWith(".zip")) {
> > > > continue;
> > > > }
> > > > + Map<String, String> nestedHeaders =
> > > > binary2License.get(n + "!/" + innerName);
> > > > + if (nestedHeaders == null)
> > > > nestedHeaders = headers;
> > > > is = zf.getInputStream(entry);
> > > > try {
> > > > - crc2LicenseHeaders.put(computeCRC3
> > > > 2(is), headers);
> > > > + crc2LicenseHeaders.put(computeCRC3
> > > > 2(is), nestedHeaders);
> > > > } finally {
> > > > is.close();
> > > > }
> > > > ---
> > > >
> > > > Would that fit into what you are doing? (The intent is basically to
> > > > allow
> > > > the -license.txt files to say something like:
> > > > Files: apache-maven-3.3.9-bin.zip!/apache-maven-3.3.9/lib/jsr250-
> > > > api-1.0.jar
> > > >
> > > > to refer to a file that is inside an external binary zip/jar.
> > > >
> > >
> > > If I'm not mistaken, the syntax you are using is the way nested
> > > resources are addressed in the java API. Sounds good and sensible to
> > > me.
> > >
> > > Your work may conflict with my changes on the source level (I did
> > > some
> > > rearranging), but should not conflict with the general changes.
> > >
> > > I think I got the changeset into a workable state and pushed it to
> > > github:
> > >
> > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396
> > >
> > > This is not the complete solution, but from my perspective should
> > > give
> > > us a solid start.
> > >
> > >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
Re: [Mentors] Re: License handling (was: Re: Ready to vote on Apache
NetBeans (incubating) 9.0 Beta RC3?)
Posted by Geertjan Wielenga <ge...@googlemail.com>.
Great and many thanks for all this work!
Two questions from me to begin to understand this:
1. How does your work relate to this file, i.e., does it replace the
file now or later or not at all:
https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/blob/master/nbbuild/rat-exclusions.txt
2. Is what you have done needed for rc3 or is it relevant for after rc3:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Apache+NetBeans+9.0+Beta+rc3
Thanks,
Gj
On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Matthias Bläsing
<mb...@doppel-helix.eu> wrote:
> Hey Mentors and all other interested,
>
> I'd like you to have a look at the work done in PR-396:
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396
>
> This adds an optional file "licenseinfo.xml" that is placed into each
> module directory. This file can address multiple filesets and for each
> set of files the information:
>
> * license (reference to one of the standard licenses)
> * license info (free text further clarifying the license, for example
> the requirement to spell out copyrights)
> * commenttype (if there is a generic reason for the explicit
> licenseinfo)
> * comment (free text to further give reason)
> * sourceOnly -> boolean and if present indicates, that these files
> don't end up in the binary build (and thus should not be present in
> the license info)
>
> Sample 1 - files distributed in the binary, various licenses:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396/commits/896c8e082f33c6dd03e3c9d39bd3ae5470c9ef60#diff-0dadd3d7a90ed77f9999bb61216fad06
>
> Sample 2 - files only used at build-time and not present in binary:
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396/commits/896c8e082f33c6dd03e3c9d39bd3ae5470c9ef60#diff-914c0a18bdf2e283ebf756d05fc424ac
>
>
> From these licenseinfo.xml files:
>
> * additional information for LICENSE is pulled (see attached samples,
> names adjusted to clarify the distribution)
> * license references are verified to be present
> * an exclusion list for the rat report is build (they would fail it
> anyway) and
> * to document this a `nbbuild/build/rat-licenseinfo.txt` file is
> created that hold the license information and comments
>
> The base work is contained in this commit:
>
> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396/commits/9639164894234623aede1a8d2f611a7571a4838f
>
> Based on this I added the information for various files in the followup
> commits (in that process also adding license info where possible and
> removing files, that are not needed).
>
> Does this sound like a reasonable way forward?
>
> Greetings,
>
> Matthias
>
>
> Am Samstag, den 27.01.2018, 22:11 +0100 schrieb Matthias Bläsing:
>> Hi Jan,
>>
>> Am Samstag, den 27.01.2018, 17:21 +0100 schrieb Jan Lahoda:
>> > On Sat, Jan 27, 2018 at 3:20 PM, Matthias Bläsing <mblaesing@doppel
>> > -helix.eu
>> > > wrote:
>> > > Hi Jan,
>> > >
>> > > Am Samstag, den 27.01.2018, 15:12 +0100 schrieb Jan Lahoda:
>> > > >
>> > > > Does this relate only to things we have in source, or also to
>> > > > external
>> > > > binaries?
>> > >
>> > > I'm only looking into the files in the repository. I'm touching
>> > > the
>> > > CreateLicenseSummary and VerifyLibsAndLicenses tasks for this.
>> > >
>> >
>> > Cool. For the maven (and probably a few more similar jars), I so
>> > far also
>> > have a tweak for CreateLicenseSummary:
>> > ---
>> > diff --git
>> > a/nbbuild/antsrc/org/netbeans/nbbuild/extlibs/CreateLicenseSummary.
>> > java
>> > b/nbbuild/antsrc/org/netbeans/nbbuild/extlibs/CreateLicenseSummary.
>> > java
>> > index da4f169..b4cef9b 100644
>> > ---
>> > a/nbbuild/antsrc/org/netbeans/nbbuild/extlibs/CreateLicenseSummary.
>> > java
>> > +++
>> > b/nbbuild/antsrc/org/netbeans/nbbuild/extlibs/CreateLicenseSummary.
>> > java
>> > @@ -253,9 +253,11 @@ public class CreateLicenseSummary extends Task
>> > {
>> > if (!innerName.endsWith(".jar") &&
>> > !innerName.endsWith(".zip")) {
>> > continue;
>> > }
>> > + Map<String, String> nestedHeaders =
>> > binary2License.get(n + "!/" + innerName);
>> > + if (nestedHeaders == null)
>> > nestedHeaders = headers;
>> > is = zf.getInputStream(entry);
>> > try {
>> > - crc2LicenseHeaders.put(computeCRC3
>> > 2(is), headers);
>> > + crc2LicenseHeaders.put(computeCRC3
>> > 2(is), nestedHeaders);
>> > } finally {
>> > is.close();
>> > }
>> > ---
>> >
>> > Would that fit into what you are doing? (The intent is basically to
>> > allow
>> > the -license.txt files to say something like:
>> > Files: apache-maven-3.3.9-bin.zip!/apache-maven-3.3.9/lib/jsr250-
>> > api-1.0.jar
>> >
>> > to refer to a file that is inside an external binary zip/jar.
>> >
>>
>> If I'm not mistaken, the syntax you are using is the way nested
>> resources are addressed in the java API. Sounds good and sensible to
>> me.
>>
>> Your work may conflict with my changes on the source level (I did
>> some
>> rearranging), but should not conflict with the general changes.
>>
>> I think I got the changeset into a workable state and pushed it to
>> github:
>>
>> https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/pull/396
>>
>> This is not the complete solution, but from my perspective should
>> give
>> us a solid start.
>>
>>
>> Greetings
>>
>> Matthias
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@netbeans.incubator.apache.o
>> rg
>>
>> For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
>
> For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
Re: [Mentors] Re: License handling (was: Re: Ready to vote on
Apache NetBeans (incubating) 9.0 Beta RC3?)
Posted by Matthias Bläsing <mb...@doppel-helix.eu>.
Hi Bertrand,
Am Montag, den 29.01.2018, 10:51 +0100 schrieb Bertrand Delacretaz:
> Hi,
>
> On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Matthias Bläsing
> <mb...@doppel-helix.eu> wrote:
> > ...I'd like you to have a look at the work done in PR-396...
>
> I haven't looked at all the details but if this allows you to have
> precise control on what goes in the LICENSE file for both the source
> code release and binary distributions that's certainly useful.
This is the reason I split the information into the modules.
Considered, that we want to publish individual modules to maven
central, these als need valid LICENSE info files and thus would need
the information for a single module build (that is yet to be done).
> As for RAT exclusions I think it's important to provide a way for
> release reviewers to get a single commented list of exclusions, with
> pointers to more details if needed but with all the key info -
> including ideally links to jira tickets for things which are a work in
> progress.
Ok understood. I pushed an update, that created a unified file, that
takes the data from the individual licenseinfo.xml files and unites
this with the global rat exclude.
We still need to move parts from rat-excludes.txt to the individual
information files, but it should do it.
Greetings
Matthias
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists
Re: [Mentors] Re: License handling (was: Re: Ready to vote on Apache
NetBeans (incubating) 9.0 Beta RC3?)
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Hi,
On Sun, Jan 28, 2018 at 5:53 PM, Matthias Bläsing
<mb...@doppel-helix.eu> wrote:
> ...I'd like you to have a look at the work done in PR-396...
I haven't looked at all the details but if this allows you to have
precise control on what goes in the LICENSE file for both the source
code release and binary distributions that's certainly useful.
As for RAT exclusions I think it's important to provide a way for
release reviewers to get a single commented list of exclusions, with
pointers to more details if needed but with all the key info -
including ideally links to jira tickets for things which are a work in
progress.
I think https://github.com/apache/incubator-netbeans/blob/master/nbbuild/rat-exclusions.txt
is a good example of that, if you switch to a mechanism where those
exclusions are defined in many places it would be good to generate
such a summary.
To me the goal with all these things are 1) to generate a valid
release and 2) be able to answer questions from release reviewers with
URLs that point to sufficiently detailed and understandable
information, without having to re-explain things every time.
-Bertrand
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@netbeans.incubator.apache.org
For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists