On Jun 22, 2012, at 7:05 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
>
> On Jun 21, 2012, at 10:46 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>
>>
>> On Jun 21, 2012, at 5:45 PM, Chris Douglas wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 5:42 PM, Marvin Humphrey <marvin@rectangular.com>
wrote:
>>>> Obeying dependency license provisions is not an ASF policy, it's a legal
>>>> requirement. Fairness is immaterial.
>>>>
>>>> If you bundle the bits, you must deal with the licensing and you must get
it
>>>> right.
>>>
>>> Sure, but that's not an issue here. The legal requirements are
>>> satisfied, as was established at length during the Kafka 0.7.0
>>> release. -C
>>
>> This reflects my sentiments as well.
>
> Alan,
> That seems to be at odds with your previous email(s) on this thread. IIUC, I think you're
more of the mind that the legal requirements are not being met, but should be fixed in the
next release, not this one.
As I think I mentioned in other emails. I am all for *vetting* the dependencies to make sure
that they follow licensing provisions and are compatible with ASF policy. This *must* be
done before *any* release.
What I claim can be put on hold until the next release is the extensive documentation of those
dependencies in the LICENSE/NOTICE that you seem to be proposing.
Regards,
Alan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
|