incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alex Harui <aha...@adobe.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Groovy 2.4.4-incubating
Date Tue, 14 Jul 2015 06:04:06 GMT


On 7/13/15, 10:43 PM, "Jochen Theodorou" <blackdrag@gmx.org> wrote:

>Am 14.07.2015 07:26, schrieb Alex Harui:
>>
>>
>> On 7/13/15, 10:05 PM, "Jochen Theodorou" <blackdrag@gmx.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> then source and binary distribution have to have different
>>> NOTICE/LICENSE files?
>>
>> Yep, I think of it as the list of allergens in the package.  If you use
>> peanut oil to cook the raw ingredients, you’d better tell the consumer.
>
>ok, but there is no harm in listing allergens that are not actually in
>there.

Hmm. I don’t agree with that.  I’ll bet food labelers are required to be
accurate.

> So why can't we have a single NOTICE/LICENSE file that covers
>both cases? Is it not possible to say something that the binary
>distribution will additionally include this and that? Having to have two
>distinct files looks unnecessarily complex to me

I think more than one project “assembles” the L & N files as part of the
build.  You can often append the additional binary package information to
the source package’s L & N.  I don’t know if any project is permitted to
ship an L & N in the source package that delineates what things are only
in the binary package.  People with more experience will answer that.

-Alex

Mime
View raw message