incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Thomas <>
Subject Re: Advice on LICENSE/NOTICE for Shaded Dependencies
Date Fri, 09 Oct 2015 20:59:00 GMT
On 09/10/2015 19:12, Stephen Mallette wrote:
> Hello all,
> I feel like I'm on the verge of getting LICENSE/NOTICE right in all
> respects in The TinkerPop.  . Seems like there's one piece that's out of
> place and could use some advice as I wasn't able to map anything I'd read
> in the Apache docs on this topic to my issue.  We currently shade several
> libraries: Kryo, minlog, objenesis, and jackson, essentially re-packaging
> those binary dependencies in a jar called gremlin-shaded.jar. The
> gremlin-shaded.jar is then made part of our zip distributions.
> As we didn't re-package the source code of these libs, I figured that the
> source LICENSE/NOTICE didn't need to change and that it was just the binary
> LICENSE/NOTICE that needed to change.  I assume this situation is somewhat
> similar to a project that builds an uber jar for distribution.
> So that's where i'm about stuck. I took a wild stab at it and did this:
> but I have no idea if that is sufficient (or just plain wrong).  If anyone
> could offer some pointers on what needs to happen here to our binary
> LICENSE/NOTICE, that would be nice.  I'd really like to see us get a clean
> bill of health on the next LICENSE/NOTICE that goes through a release vote.

Looks good to me. The only thing I'd consider adding is what package
they were renamed to.


To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message