[VOTE] Approve the release of Apache Abdera 0.4.0-incubating (updated)
|
View:
New views
20 Messages
—
Rating Filter:
Alert me
|
| < Prev | 1 - 2 | Next > |
 |
[VOTE] Approve the release of Apache Abdera 0.4.0-incubating (updated)
by James M Snell
::
Rate this Message:
The Abdera project has resolved the issues raised previously and have
voted to release a new build of the 0.4.0-incubating release. Binary distributions: http://people.apache.org/~dandiep/abdera-take6/org/apache/abdera/apache-abdera/0.4.0-incubating/apache-abdera-0.4.0-incubating.zip http://people.apache.org/~dandiep/abdera-take6/org/apache/abdera/apache-abdera/0.4.0-incubating/apache-abdera-0.4.0-incubating.tar.gz Source distributions: http://people.apache.org/~dandiep/abdera-take6/org/apache/abdera/apache-abdera/0.4.0-incubating/apache-abdera-0.4.0-incubating-src.zip http://people.apache.org/~dandiep/abdera-take6/org/apache/abdera/apache-abdera/0.4.0-incubating/apache-abdera-0.4.0-incubating-src.tar.gz Maven Repository: http://people.apache.org/~dandiep/abdera-take6/ Please take a look and cast your vote! - Abdera Team --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@... For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@... |
|
|
Re: [VOTE] Approve the release of Apache Abdera 0.4.0-incubating (updated)
by sebb-2-2
::
Rate this Message:
On 31/03/2008, James M Snell <jasnell@...> wrote:
> The Abdera project has resolved the issues raised previously and have > voted to release a new build of the 0.4.0-incubating release. > > Binary distributions: > > http://people.apache.org/~dandiep/abdera-take6/org/apache/abdera/apache-abdera/0.4.0-incubating/apache-abdera-0.4.0-incubating.zip > http://people.apache.org/~dandiep/abdera-take6/org/apache/abdera/apache-abdera/0.4.0-incubating/apache-abdera-0.4.0-incubating.tar.gz > > Source distributions: > > http://people.apache.org/~dandiep/abdera-take6/org/apache/abdera/apache-abdera/0.4.0-incubating/apache-abdera-0.4.0-incubating-src.zip > http://people.apache.org/~dandiep/abdera-take6/org/apache/abdera/apache-abdera/0.4.0-incubating/apache-abdera-0.4.0-incubating-src.tar.gz > -1: There are MD5 and SHA1 digests in the directory, but the archives have no signatures. > Maven Repository: http://people.apache.org/~dandiep/abdera-take6/ > -0: The abdera-bundle-0.4.0-incubating-sources.jar does not appear to have any content - only the META-INF directory is present. Is that correct? -1: The NOTICE files in that jar (and others) contains far too much. The NOTICE file is for required attribtions ONLY (e.g. as per an About box) There's really no need to repeat ASF for each project used by Abdera. -0: The Maven abdera-bundle-0.4.0-incubating.jar file contains a LICENSE for Xalan and HtmlParser, but does not actually contain either. -1: The LICENSE files need to either contain copies of the 3rd party licenses, or they need to have a reference to the 3rd party licences. Equally, there is no need for the lib directory to contain copies of the AL for every ASF product. -1: RAT report says: 99 Unknown Licenses Some of these are trivial, but most require an AL header. What is the SVN tag that corresponds with the archives? === Other comments === mvn test succeeded, however there were quite a few stack traces printed. If possible, these should be suppressed. The jar MANIFEST files could do with a bit more information. This makes it easier to trace the provenance of the jars. For example: Built-By: xxxxx Implementation-Title: Apache Abdera (Incubating) Implementation-Vendor: The Apache Software Foundation Implementation-Vendor-Id: org.apache Implementation-Version: Specification-Title: Specification-Vendor: The Apache Software Foundation Specification-Version: xxx Build-Jdk: 1.5.0_12 (e.g.) X-Compile-Source-JDK: 1.3 (e.g.) X-Compile-Target-JDK: 1.3 (e.g.) > Please take a look and cast your vote! > > - Abdera Team > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@... > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@... > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@... For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@... |
|
|
Re: [VOTE] Approve the release of Apache Abdera 0.4.0-incubating (updated)
by Dan Diephouse-2
::
Rate this Message:
sebb wrote:
> On 31/03/2008, James M Snell <jasnell@...> wrote: > >> > > -1: There are MD5 and SHA1 digests in the directory, but the archives > have no signatures. > > OK, I will fix this. >> Maven Repository: http://people.apache.org/~dandiep/abdera-take6/ >> >> > > -0: The abdera-bundle-0.4.0-incubating-sources.jar does not appear to > have any content - only the META-INF directory is present. Is that > correct? > This is just a by-product of Maven. We can delete it. > -1: The NOTICE files in that jar (and others) contains far too much. > The NOTICE file is for required attribtions ONLY (e.g. as per an About box) > There's really no need to repeat ASF for each project used by Abdera. > Having too much information in the NOTICE files is not a crime. The Maven remote-resources plugin aggregates all this stuff for us so we never miss any notice that we need to put in. > -1: The LICENSE files need to either contain copies of the 3rd party > licenses, or they need to have a reference to the 3rd party licences. > Equally, there is no need for the lib directory to contain copies of > the AL for every ASF product. > Why does the LICENSE file need to have a copy of all the other licenses? These are contained in the lib/ directory like many other ASF projects. Re: the ASL license in lib/ - once again having too much information is not a crime. This is a service to uesrs so they know where the libraries came from. > -1: RAT report says: > > 99 Unknown Licenses > > Some of these are trivial, but most require an AL header. > Not true - there is not consensus that properties/xml files need to have headers. All the Java source code files have headers. If there are specific files that you feel should have a license that don't please list them and explain why. I'm not saying that we didn't miss something, but I am saying that the ones that I know about don't necessarily require a header. > What is the SVN tag that corresponds with the archives? > > the branch will be tagged once its released. Dan -- Dan Diephouse MuleSource http://mulesource.com | http://netzooid.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@... For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@... |
|
|
Re: [VOTE] Approve the release of Apache Abdera 0.4.0-incubating (updated)
by Dan Diephouse-2
::
Rate this Message:
I removed the empty sources jar and tagged the release:
Dan Diephouse wrote: > sebb wrote: >> On 31/03/2008, James M Snell <jasnell@...> wrote: >> >>> >> >> -1: There are MD5 and SHA1 digests in the directory, but the archives >> have no signatures. >> >> > OK, I will fix this. >>> Maven Repository: http://people.apache.org/~dandiep/abdera-take6/ >>> >>> >> >> -0: The abdera-bundle-0.4.0-incubating-sources.jar does not appear to >> have any content - only the META-INF directory is present. Is that >> correct? >> > This is just a by-product of Maven. We can delete it. >> -1: The NOTICE files in that jar (and others) contains far too much. >> The NOTICE file is for required attribtions ONLY (e.g. as per an >> About box) >> There's really no need to repeat ASF for each project used by Abdera. >> > Having too much information in the NOTICE files is not a crime. The > Maven remote-resources plugin aggregates all this stuff for us so we > never miss any notice that we need to put in. >> -1: The LICENSE files need to either contain copies of the 3rd party >> licenses, or they need to have a reference to the 3rd party licences. >> Equally, there is no need for the lib directory to contain copies of >> the AL for every ASF product. >> > Why does the LICENSE file need to have a copy of all the other > licenses? These are contained in the lib/ directory like many other > ASF projects. > > Re: the ASL license in lib/ - once again having too much information > is not a crime. This is a service to uesrs so they know where the > libraries came from. >> -1: RAT report says: >> >> 99 Unknown Licenses >> >> Some of these are trivial, but most require an AL header. >> > Not true - there is not consensus that properties/xml files need to > have headers. All the Java source code files have headers. If there > are specific files that you feel should have a license that don't > please list them and explain why. I'm not saying that we didn't miss > something, but I am saying that the ones that I know about don't > necessarily require a header. >> What is the SVN tag that corresponds with the archives? >> >> > the branch will be tagged once its released. > > Dan > -- Dan Diephouse MuleSource http://mulesource.com | http://netzooid.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@... For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@... |
|
|
Re: [VOTE] Approve the release of Apache Abdera 0.4.0-incubating (updated)
by Dan Diephouse-2
::
Rate this Message:
Oops hit "ctrl enter" instead of "ctrl-v enter". Here's the tag:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/abdera/java/tags/abdera-0.4.0-incubating/ Dan Dan Diephouse wrote: > I removed the empty sources jar and tagged the release: > > Dan Diephouse wrote: >> sebb wrote: >>> On 31/03/2008, James M Snell <jasnell@...> wrote: >>> >>>> >>> >>> -1: There are MD5 and SHA1 digests in the directory, but the archives >>> have no signatures. >>> >>> >> OK, I will fix this. >>>> Maven Repository: http://people.apache.org/~dandiep/abdera-take6/ >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -0: The abdera-bundle-0.4.0-incubating-sources.jar does not appear to >>> have any content - only the META-INF directory is present. Is that >>> correct? >>> >> This is just a by-product of Maven. We can delete it. >>> -1: The NOTICE files in that jar (and others) contains far too much. >>> The NOTICE file is for required attribtions ONLY (e.g. as per an >>> About box) >>> There's really no need to repeat ASF for each project used by Abdera. >>> >> Having too much information in the NOTICE files is not a crime. The >> Maven remote-resources plugin aggregates all this stuff for us so we >> never miss any notice that we need to put in. >>> -1: The LICENSE files need to either contain copies of the 3rd party >>> licenses, or they need to have a reference to the 3rd party licences. >>> Equally, there is no need for the lib directory to contain copies of >>> the AL for every ASF product. >>> >> Why does the LICENSE file need to have a copy of all the other >> licenses? These are contained in the lib/ directory like many other >> ASF projects. >> >> Re: the ASL license in lib/ - once again having too much information >> is not a crime. This is a service to uesrs so they know where the >> libraries came from. >>> -1: RAT report says: >>> >>> 99 Unknown Licenses >>> >>> Some of these are trivial, but most require an AL header. >>> >> Not true - there is not consensus that properties/xml files need to >> have headers. All the Java source code files have headers. If there >> are specific files that you feel should have a license that don't >> please list them and explain why. I'm not saying that we didn't miss >> something, but I am saying that the ones that I know about don't >> necessarily require a header. >>> What is the SVN tag that corresponds with the archives? >>> >>> >> the branch will be tagged once its released. >> >> Dan >> > > -- Dan Diephouse MuleSource http://mulesource.com | http://netzooid.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@... For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@... |
|
|
Re: [VOTE] Approve the release of Apache Abdera 0.4.0-incubating (updated)
by sebb-2-2
::
Rate this Message:
On 31/03/2008, Dan Diephouse <dan.diephouse@...> wrote:
> sebb wrote: > > On 31/03/2008, James M Snell <jasnell@...> wrote: > > > >> > > > > > -1: There are MD5 and SHA1 digests in the directory, but the archives > > have no signatures. > > > > > > OK, I will fix this. > > >> Maven Repository: http://people.apache.org/~dandiep/abdera-take6/ > >> > >> > > > > -0: The abdera-bundle-0.4.0-incubating-sources.jar does not appear to > > have any content - only the META-INF directory is present. Is that > > correct? > > > > This is just a by-product of Maven. We can delete it. > > > -1: The NOTICE files in that jar (and others) contains far too much. > > The NOTICE file is for required attribtions ONLY (e.g. as per an About box) > > There's really no need to repeat ASF for each project used by Abdera. > > > > Having too much information in the NOTICE files is not a crime. The > Maven remote-resources plugin aggregates all this stuff for us so we > never miss any notice that we need to put in. Unfortunately the plugin generates incorrect information. It *is* a problem having all the redundant information. See for example: http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html also http://wiki.apache.org/legal/3party/notice http://wiki.apache.org/legal/3party/notice/discuss > > -1: The LICENSE files need to either contain copies of the 3rd party > > licenses, or they need to have a reference to the 3rd party licences. > > Equally, there is no need for the lib directory to contain copies of > > the AL for every ASF product. > > > > Why does the LICENSE file need to have a copy of all the other licenses? > These are contained in the lib/ directory like many other ASF projects. > See the last paragraph of: http://www.apache.org/dev/apply-license.html#new > Re: the ASL license in lib/ - once again having too much information is > not a crime. This is a service to uesrs so they know where the libraries > came from. I agree the source is useful, but the place for this is the LICENSE file. > > -1: RAT report says: > > > > 99 Unknown Licenses > > > > Some of these are trivial, but most require an AL header. > > > > Not true - there is not consensus that properties/xml files need to have > headers. All the Java source code files have headers. If there are > specific files that you feel should have a license that don't please > list them and explain why. I'm not saying that we didn't miss something, > but I am saying that the ones that I know about don't necessarily > require a header. Yes, they do, see: http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq-exceptions > > What is the SVN tag that corresponds with the archives? > > > > > > the branch will be tagged once its released. > > Dan > > > -- > Dan Diephouse > MuleSource > http://mulesource.com | http://netzooid.com > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@... > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@... > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@... For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@... |
|
|
Re: [VOTE] Approve the release of Apache Abdera 0.4.0-incubating (updated)
by James M Snell
::
Rate this Message:
In the FAQ I see this: "A file without any degree of creativity in
either its literal elements or its structure is not protected by copyright law; therefore, such a file does not require a license header. If in doubt about the extent of the file's creativity, add the license header to the file." Here's the breakdown that I see from Rat: None of the build scripts contain license headers. Given that the build scripts are everyday, normal maven build scripts, I do believe they qualify under the "a file without any degree of creativity" clause. ? adapters/pom.xml ? client/pom.xml ? core/pom.xml ? examples/pom.xml ? extensions/pom.xml ? extensions/gdata/pom.xml ? extensions/geo/pom.xml ? extensions/html/pom.xml ? extensions/json/pom.xml ? extensions/main/pom.xml ? extensions/media/pom.xml ? extensions/oauth/pom.xml ? extensions/opensearch/pom.xml ? extensions/serializer/pom.xml ? extensions/sharing/pom.xml ? extensions/wsse/pom.xml ? parser/pom.xml ? security/pom.xml ? server/pom.xml ? spring/pom.xml ? dependencies/deps.properties The following file used to provide localization strings may possibly require a license header. ? core/src/main/resources/abderamessages.properties The following are configuration files used at runtime, the majority of which consist of only a few lines of text and also fall under the above quoted clause. ? client/src/main/java/log4j.properties ? core/src/main/resources/abdera.properties.example ? core/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory.example ? core/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory ? core/src/test/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.converter.ConverterProvider ? examples/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory ? extensions/complete/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.writer.NamedWriter ? extensions/complete/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory ? extensions/complete/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.parser.NamedParser ? extensions/html/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.parser.NamedParser ? extensions/json/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.writer.NamedWriter !????? extensions/main/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory ? extensions/media/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory ? extensions/opensearch/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory ? extensions/sharing/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory ? parser/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.writer.NamedWriter ? contrib/rss/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory The following simple files are used for example purposes and do not contain any creative content whatsoever. ? examples/src/main/resources/xmlcontent.xml ? examples/src/main/resources/log4j.properties ? examples/src/main/resources/simple.xml ? examples/src/main/resources/test.xslt ? examples/src/main/resources/content.xslt ? examples/src/main/resources/org/apache/abdera/examples/appserver/web.xml The following were also (inappropriately) flagged by RAT ? extensions/complete/resources/META-INF/LICENSE.htmlparser.txt ? extensions/complete/resources/META-INF/NOTICE.htmlparser.txt ? extensions/complete/resources/META-INF/NOTICE.serializer.txt ? extensions/json/src/main/resources/META-INF/LICENSE.htmlparser.txt ? extensions/json/src/main/resources/META-INF/NOTICE.htmlparser.txt ? extensions/json/src/main/resources/META-INF/NOTICE.serializer.txt ? dependencies/legal/servlet-api-LICENSE.txt ? dependencies/legal/htmlparser-LICENSE.txt The following resources are test resources that in addition to not containing any degree of creative content, they arguably should not contain license headers because the presence of the license header could potentially impact the results of the tests. ? adapters/hibernate/src/test/resources/abdera/adapter/hibernate.cfg.xml ? adapters/hibernate/src/test/resources/abdera/adapter/DummyData.hbm.xml ? extensions/opensearch/src/test/resources/opensearch.xml ? parser/src/test/resources/www.snellspace.com/public/nondefaultnamespace.xml ? parser/src/test/resources/www.snellspace.com/public/nondefaultnamespace3.xml ? parser/src/test/resources/www.snellspace.com/public/nondefaultnamespace2.xml ? parser/src/test/resources/www.snellspace.com/public/xmlbase.xml ? parser/src/test/resources/www.snellspace.com/public/ordertest.xml ? parser/src/test/resources/www.snellspace.com/public/linktests.xml ? parser/src/test/resources/www.snellspace.com/public/contentsummary.xml ? parser/src/test/resources/simpleFeed.xml ? parser/src/test/resources/xmlcontent.xml ? parser/src/test/resources/feed.xml ? parser/src/test/resources/simple.xml ? parser/src/test/resources/www.feedparser.org/tests/wellformed/atom10/entry_content_base64_2.xml ? parser/src/test/resources/www.feedparser.org/tests/wellformed/atom10/entry_content_base64.xml ? parser/src/test/resources/www.feedparser.org/tests/wellformed/atom10/entry_author_email.xml ? parser/src/test/resources/www.feedparser.org/tests/wellformed/atom10/entry_author_name.xml ? parser/src/test/resources/www.feedparser.org/tests/wellformed/atom10/atom10_namespace.xml ? parser/src/test/resources/complete.xml ? parser/src/test/resources/simpleService.xml ? parser/src/test/resources/simpleEntry.xml ? parser/src/test/resources/test.xslt ? parser/src/test/resources/entry.xml ? parser/src/test/resources/content.xslt ? spring/src/test/resources/org/apache/abdera/spring/beans.xml ? contrib/rss/src/test/resources/rss1.rdf ? adapters/hibernate/src/test/resources/abdera/adapter/hibernate.properties ? security/src/test/resources/log4j.properties ? server/src/test/resources/abdera/adapter/sample.properties This one documentation file, which contains only a single one sentence statement, does not contain a license header. ? docs/knownissues.txt Which of these files do you think we absolutely have to add license headers to? - James sebb wrote: > On 31/03/2008, Dan Diephouse <dan.diephouse@...> wrote: >> sebb wrote: >> > On 31/03/2008, James M Snell <jasnell@...> wrote: >> > >> >> >> > >> >>> -1: There are MD5 and SHA1 digests in the directory, but the archives >> > have no signatures. >> > >> > >> >> OK, I will fix this. >> >>>> Maven Repository: http://people.apache.org/~dandiep/abdera-take6/ >> >> >> >> >> > >> > -0: The abdera-bundle-0.4.0-incubating-sources.jar does not appear to >> > have any content - only the META-INF directory is present. Is that >> > correct? >> > >> >> This is just a by-product of Maven. We can delete it. >> >>> -1: The NOTICE files in that jar (and others) contains far too much. >> > The NOTICE file is for required attribtions ONLY (e.g. as per an About box) >> > There's really no need to repeat ASF for each project used by Abdera. >> > >> >> Having too much information in the NOTICE files is not a crime. The >> Maven remote-resources plugin aggregates all this stuff for us so we >> never miss any notice that we need to put in. > > Unfortunately the plugin generates incorrect information. > It *is* a problem having all the redundant information. > > See for example: > > http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html > also > http://wiki.apache.org/legal/3party/notice > http://wiki.apache.org/legal/3party/notice/discuss > >>> -1: The LICENSE files need to either contain copies of the 3rd party >> > licenses, or they need to have a reference to the 3rd party licences. >> > Equally, there is no need for the lib directory to contain copies of >> > the AL for every ASF product. >> > >> >> Why does the LICENSE file need to have a copy of all the other licenses? >> These are contained in the lib/ directory like many other ASF projects. >> > > See the last paragraph of: > > http://www.apache.org/dev/apply-license.html#new > >> Re: the ASL license in lib/ - once again having too much information is >> not a crime. This is a service to uesrs so they know where the libraries >> came from. > > I agree the source is useful, but the place for this is the LICENSE file. > >>> -1: RAT report says: >> > >> > 99 Unknown Licenses >> > >> > Some of these are trivial, but most require an AL header. >> > >> >> Not true - there is not consensus that properties/xml files need to have >> headers. All the Java source code files have headers. If there are >> specific files that you feel should have a license that don't please >> list them and explain why. I'm not saying that we didn't miss something, >> but I am saying that the ones that I know about don't necessarily >> require a header. > > Yes, they do, see: > > http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq-exceptions > >>> What is the SVN tag that corresponds with the archives? >> > >> > >> >> the branch will be tagged once its released. >> >> Dan >> >> >> -- >> Dan Diephouse >> MuleSource >> http://mulesource.com | http://netzooid.com >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@... >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@... >> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@... > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@... > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@... For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@... |
|
|
Re: [VOTE] Approve the release of Apache Abdera 0.4.0-incubating (updated)
by Dan Diephouse-2
::
Rate this Message:
sebb wrote:
> >> > The NOTICE file is for required attribtions ONLY (e.g. as per an About box) >> > There's really no need to repeat ASF for each project used by Abdera. >> > >> >> Having too much information in the NOTICE files is not a crime. The >> Maven remote-resources plugin aggregates all this stuff for us so we >> never miss any notice that we need to put in. >> > > Unfortunately the plugin generates incorrect information. > attributions for all the ASF projects we reuse. > It *is* a problem having all the redundant information. > > See for example: > > http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html > also > http://wiki.apache.org/legal/3party/notice > http://wiki.apache.org/legal/3party/notice/discuss > It says "should" not requires w.r.t. the mandatory license attributions. Once again, I maintain that this is not a problem. >>> -1: The LICENSE files need to either contain copies of the 3rd party >>> >> > licenses, or they need to have a reference to the 3rd party licences. >> > Equally, there is no need for the lib directory to contain copies of >> > the AL for every ASF product. >> > >> >> Why does the LICENSE file need to have a copy of all the other licenses? >> These are contained in the lib/ directory like many other ASF projects. >> >> > > See the last paragraph of: > > http://www.apache.org/dev/apply-license.html#new > > license" - which we in the NOTICE file. There is not a legal requirement here that it must be in the LICENSE file itself - if so, please point me to the place in the license. This is page is to provide "guidance" (see the first sentence), not be the ultimate authority on what exactly is legally permissible for distributions. If you look at many other ASF projects in the incubator and outside, you'll see that this is not an enforced policy - this is simply telling developers one way to get started here. Dan -- Dan Diephouse MuleSource http://mulesource.com | http://netzooid.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@... For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@... |
|
|
Re: [VOTE] Approve the release of Apache Abdera 0.4.0-incubating (updated)
by Luciano Resende
::
Rate this Message:
I'd probably error on the side of caution here, and add license
headers in all files, unless it breakes something. Most if not all projects does add the license headers in maven pom files, property files, etc. I'd suggest you to fix at least in trunk, but as you mentioned you need to fix the the file below [1], I'd then recommend fixing as much as possible from the list you have. [1] core/src/main/resources/abderamessages.properties On Mon, Mar 31, 2008 at 1:59 PM, James M Snell <jasnell@...> wrote: > In the FAQ I see this: "A file without any degree of creativity in > either its literal elements or its structure is not protected by > copyright law; therefore, such a file does not require a license header. > If in doubt about the extent of the file's creativity, add the license > header to the file." > > Here's the breakdown that I see from Rat: > > None of the build scripts contain license headers. Given that the build > scripts are everyday, normal maven build scripts, I do believe they > qualify under the "a file without any degree of creativity" clause. > > ? adapters/pom.xml > ? client/pom.xml > ? core/pom.xml > ? examples/pom.xml > ? extensions/pom.xml > ? extensions/gdata/pom.xml > ? extensions/geo/pom.xml > ? extensions/html/pom.xml > ? extensions/json/pom.xml > ? extensions/main/pom.xml > ? extensions/media/pom.xml > ? extensions/oauth/pom.xml > ? extensions/opensearch/pom.xml > ? extensions/serializer/pom.xml > ? extensions/sharing/pom.xml > ? extensions/wsse/pom.xml > ? parser/pom.xml > ? security/pom.xml > ? server/pom.xml > ? spring/pom.xml > ? dependencies/deps.properties > > The following file used to provide localization strings may possibly > require a license header. > > ? core/src/main/resources/abderamessages.properties > > The following are configuration files used at runtime, the majority of > which consist of only a few lines of text and also fall under the above > quoted clause. > > ? client/src/main/java/log4j.properties > ? core/src/main/resources/abdera.properties.example > ? > core/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory.example > ? > core/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory > ? > core/src/test/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.converter.ConverterProvider > ? > examples/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory > ? > extensions/complete/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.writer.NamedWriter > ? > extensions/complete/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory > ? > extensions/complete/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.parser.NamedParser > ? > extensions/html/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.parser.NamedParser > ? > extensions/json/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.writer.NamedWriter > !????? > extensions/main/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory > ? > extensions/media/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory > ? > extensions/opensearch/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory > ? > extensions/sharing/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory > ? > parser/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.writer.NamedWriter > ? > contrib/rss/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory > > > > The following simple files are used for example purposes and do not > contain any creative content whatsoever. > > ? examples/src/main/resources/xmlcontent.xml > ? examples/src/main/resources/log4j.properties > ? examples/src/main/resources/simple.xml > ? examples/src/main/resources/test.xslt > ? examples/src/main/resources/content.xslt > ? examples/src/main/resources/org/apache/abdera/examples/appserver/web.xml > > The following were also (inappropriately) flagged by RAT > > ? extensions/complete/resources/META-INF/LICENSE.htmlparser.txt > ? extensions/complete/resources/META-INF/NOTICE.htmlparser.txt > ? extensions/complete/resources/META-INF/NOTICE.serializer.txt > ? extensions/json/src/main/resources/META-INF/LICENSE.htmlparser.txt > ? extensions/json/src/main/resources/META-INF/NOTICE.htmlparser.txt > ? extensions/json/src/main/resources/META-INF/NOTICE.serializer.txt > ? dependencies/legal/servlet-api-LICENSE.txt > ? dependencies/legal/htmlparser-LICENSE.txt > > > The following resources are test resources that in addition to not > containing any degree of creative content, they arguably should not > contain license headers because the presence of the license header could > potentially impact the results of the tests. > > ? adapters/hibernate/src/test/resources/abdera/adapter/hibernate.cfg.xml > ? adapters/hibernate/src/test/resources/abdera/adapter/DummyData.hbm.xml > ? extensions/opensearch/src/test/resources/opensearch.xml > ? > parser/src/test/resources/www.snellspace.com/public/nondefaultnamespace.xml > ? > parser/src/test/resources/www.snellspace.com/public/nondefaultnamespace3.xml > ? > parser/src/test/resources/www.snellspace.com/public/nondefaultnamespace2.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/www.snellspace.com/public/xmlbase.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/www.snellspace.com/public/ordertest.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/www.snellspace.com/public/linktests.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/www.snellspace.com/public/contentsummary.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/simpleFeed.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/xmlcontent.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/feed.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/simple.xml > ? > parser/src/test/resources/www.feedparser.org/tests/wellformed/atom10/entry_content_base64_2.xml > ? > parser/src/test/resources/www.feedparser.org/tests/wellformed/atom10/entry_content_base64.xml > ? > parser/src/test/resources/www.feedparser.org/tests/wellformed/atom10/entry_author_email.xml > ? > parser/src/test/resources/www.feedparser.org/tests/wellformed/atom10/entry_author_name.xml > ? > parser/src/test/resources/www.feedparser.org/tests/wellformed/atom10/atom10_namespace.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/complete.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/simpleService.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/simpleEntry.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/test.xslt > ? parser/src/test/resources/entry.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/content.xslt > ? spring/src/test/resources/org/apache/abdera/spring/beans.xml > ? contrib/rss/src/test/resources/rss1.rdf > ? > adapters/hibernate/src/test/resources/abdera/adapter/hibernate.properties > ? security/src/test/resources/log4j.properties > ? server/src/test/resources/abdera/adapter/sample.properties > > This one documentation file, which contains only a single one sentence > statement, does not contain a license header. > > ? docs/knownissues.txt > > Which of these files do you think we absolutely have to add license > headers to? > > - James > > > > sebb wrote: > > On 31/03/2008, Dan Diephouse <dan.diephouse@...> wrote: > >> sebb wrote: > >> > On 31/03/2008, James M Snell <jasnell@...> wrote: > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> > >>> -1: There are MD5 and SHA1 digests in the directory, but the archives > >> > have no signatures. > >> > > >> > > >> > >> OK, I will fix this. > >> > >>>> Maven Repository: http://people.apache.org/~dandiep/abdera-take6/ > >> >> > >> >> > >> > > >> > -0: The abdera-bundle-0.4.0-incubating-sources.jar does not appear to > >> > have any content - only the META-INF directory is present. Is that > >> > correct? > >> > > >> > >> This is just a by-product of Maven. We can delete it. > >> > >>> -1: The NOTICE files in that jar (and others) contains far too much. > >> > The NOTICE file is for required attribtions ONLY (e.g. as per an About box) > >> > There's really no need to repeat ASF for each project used by Abdera. > >> > > >> > >> Having too much information in the NOTICE files is not a crime. The > >> Maven remote-resources plugin aggregates all this stuff for us so we > >> never miss any notice that we need to put in. > > > > Unfortunately the plugin generates incorrect information. > > It *is* a problem having all the redundant information. > > > > See for example: > > > > http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html > > also > > http://wiki.apache.org/legal/3party/notice > > http://wiki.apache.org/legal/3party/notice/discuss > > > >>> -1: The LICENSE files need to either contain copies of the 3rd party > >> > licenses, or they need to have a reference to the 3rd party licences. > >> > Equally, there is no need for the lib directory to contain copies of > >> > the AL for every ASF product. > >> > > >> > >> Why does the LICENSE file need to have a copy of all the other licenses? > >> These are contained in the lib/ directory like many other ASF projects. > >> > > > > See the last paragraph of: > > > > http://www.apache.org/dev/apply-license.html#new > > > >> Re: the ASL license in lib/ - once again having too much information is > >> not a crime. This is a service to uesrs so they know where the libraries > >> came from. > > > > I agree the source is useful, but the place for this is the LICENSE file. > > > >>> -1: RAT report says: > >> > > >> > 99 Unknown Licenses > >> > > >> > Some of these are trivial, but most require an AL header. > >> > > >> > >> Not true - there is not consensus that properties/xml files need to have > >> headers. All the Java source code files have headers. If there are > >> specific files that you feel should have a license that don't please > >> list them and explain why. I'm not saying that we didn't miss something, > >> but I am saying that the ones that I know about don't necessarily > >> require a header. > > > > Yes, they do, see: > > > > http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq-exceptions > > > >>> What is the SVN tag that corresponds with the archives? > >> > > >> > > >> > >> the branch will be tagged once its released. > >> > >> Dan > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Dan Diephouse > >> MuleSource > >> http://mulesource.com | http://netzooid.com > >> > >> > >> > >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@... > >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@... > >> > >> > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@... > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@... > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@... > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@... > > -- Luciano Resende Apache Tuscany Committer http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://lresende.blogspot.com/ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@... For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@... |
|
|
Re: [VOTE] Approve the release of Apache Abdera 0.4.0-incubating (updated)
by sebb-2-2
::
Rate this Message:
On 31/03/2008, James M Snell <jasnell@...> wrote:
> In the FAQ I see this: "A file without any degree of creativity in > either its literal elements or its structure is not protected by > copyright law; therefore, such a file does not require a license header. Yes, but: > If in doubt about the extent of the file's creativity, add the license > header to the file." > Here's the breakdown that I see from Rat: > > None of the build scripts contain license headers. Given that the build > scripts are everyday, normal maven build scripts, I do believe they > qualify under the "a file without any degree of creativity" clause. I disagree. Note that all Commons poms include the AL header. > ? adapters/pom.xml > ? client/pom.xml > ? core/pom.xml > ? examples/pom.xml > ? extensions/pom.xml > ? extensions/gdata/pom.xml > ? extensions/geo/pom.xml > ? extensions/html/pom.xml > ? extensions/json/pom.xml > ? extensions/main/pom.xml > ? extensions/media/pom.xml > ? extensions/oauth/pom.xml > ? extensions/opensearch/pom.xml > ? extensions/serializer/pom.xml > ? extensions/sharing/pom.xml > ? extensions/wsse/pom.xml > ? parser/pom.xml > ? security/pom.xml > ? server/pom.xml > ? spring/pom.xml > ? dependencies/deps.properties > > The following file used to provide localization strings may possibly > require a license header. > > ? core/src/main/resources/abderamessages.properties > > The following are configuration files used at runtime, the majority of > which consist of only a few lines of text and also fall under the above > quoted clause. > > ? client/src/main/java/log4j.properties > ? core/src/main/resources/abdera.properties.example > ? These have less content, so the creative aspect is definitely lower. However, I don't think there's no creativity involved. > core/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory.example > ? > core/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory > ? > core/src/test/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.converter.ConverterProvider > ? > examples/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory > ? > extensions/complete/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.writer.NamedWriter > ? > extensions/complete/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory > ? > extensions/complete/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.parser.NamedParser > ? > extensions/html/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.parser.NamedParser > ? > extensions/json/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.writer.NamedWriter > !????? > extensions/main/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory > ? > extensions/media/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory > ? > extensions/opensearch/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory > ? > extensions/sharing/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory > ? > parser/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.writer.NamedWriter > ? > contrib/rss/src/main/resources/META-INF/services/org.apache.abdera.factory.ExtensionFactory > Agreed. > > The following simple files are used for example purposes and do not > contain any creative content whatsoever. > > ? examples/src/main/resources/xmlcontent.xml > ? examples/src/main/resources/log4j.properties > ? examples/src/main/resources/simple.xml > ? examples/src/main/resources/test.xslt > ? examples/src/main/resources/content.xslt > ? examples/src/main/resources/org/apache/abdera/examples/appserver/web.xml Not much creativity, and small files, so the AL header is not essential. > The following were also (inappropriately) flagged by RAT > > ? extensions/complete/resources/META-INF/LICENSE.htmlparser.txt > ? extensions/complete/resources/META-INF/NOTICE.htmlparser.txt > ? extensions/complete/resources/META-INF/NOTICE.serializer.txt > ? extensions/json/src/main/resources/META-INF/LICENSE.htmlparser.txt > ? extensions/json/src/main/resources/META-INF/NOTICE.htmlparser.txt > ? extensions/json/src/main/resources/META-INF/NOTICE.serializer.txt > ? dependencies/legal/servlet-api-LICENSE.txt > ? dependencies/legal/htmlparser-LICENSE.txt > > > The following resources are test resources that in addition to not > containing any degree of creative content, they arguably should not > contain license headers because the presence of the license header could > potentially impact the results of the tests. > Probably. Though if the AL header affects the parsing, then there may well be a problem with the parsing... > ? adapters/hibernate/src/test/resources/abdera/adapter/hibernate.cfg.xml > ? adapters/hibernate/src/test/resources/abdera/adapter/DummyData.hbm.xml > ? extensions/opensearch/src/test/resources/opensearch.xml > ? > parser/src/test/resources/www.snellspace.com/public/nondefaultnamespace.xml > ? > parser/src/test/resources/www.snellspace.com/public/nondefaultnamespace3.xml > ? > parser/src/test/resources/www.snellspace.com/public/nondefaultnamespace2.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/www.snellspace.com/public/xmlbase.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/www.snellspace.com/public/ordertest.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/www.snellspace.com/public/linktests.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/www.snellspace.com/public/contentsummary.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/simpleFeed.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/xmlcontent.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/feed.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/simple.xml > ? > parser/src/test/resources/www.feedparser.org/tests/wellformed/atom10/entry_content_base64_2.xml > ? > parser/src/test/resources/www.feedparser.org/tests/wellformed/atom10/entry_content_base64.xml > ? > parser/src/test/resources/www.feedparser.org/tests/wellformed/atom10/entry_author_email.xml > ? > parser/src/test/resources/www.feedparser.org/tests/wellformed/atom10/entry_author_name.xml > ? > parser/src/test/resources/www.feedparser.org/tests/wellformed/atom10/atom10_namespace.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/complete.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/simpleService.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/simpleEntry.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/test.xslt > ? parser/src/test/resources/entry.xml > ? parser/src/test/resources/content.xslt > ? spring/src/test/resources/org/apache/abdera/spring/beans.xml > ? contrib/rss/src/test/resources/rss1.rdf > ? > adapters/hibernate/src/test/resources/abdera/adapter/hibernate.properties > ? security/src/test/resources/log4j.properties > ? server/src/test/resources/abdera/adapter/sample.properties > > This one documentation file, which contains only a single one sentence > statement, does not contain a license header. > > ? docs/knownissues.txt > > Which of these files do you think we absolutely have to add license > headers to? > > > - James > > > sebb wrote: > > On 31/03/2008, Dan Diephouse <dan.diephouse@...> wrote: > >> sebb wrote: > >> > On 31/03/2008, James M Snell <jasnell@...> wrote: > >> > > >> >> > >> > > >> > >>> -1: There are MD5 and SHA1 digests in the directory, but the archives > >> > have no signatures. > >> > > >> > |
