incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Felix Meschberger <>
Subject Re: Images in source code.
Date Fri, 16 Jun 2017 00:13:32 GMT
Here: ?


(Thanks Google ;-) )


Am 15.06.2017 um 16:46 schrieb Martin Gainty <<>>:

James and Team

quick update I have factored rat-plugin to read XMP (an XML metadata-tagged file with embedded

i have tried adding metadata tags using the crippled freebie photoshop and could not find
any way to add metadata tags to PNG, JPG or PSD as the File/FileInfo menu in freebie photoshop
is hopelessly greyed out/disabled

Im reading some blogs that exiftool<sp?> can add metadata tags to any existing image

Any clues as to where to locate any tool that can add metadata tag to an Image would be appreciated



From: Martin Gainty <<>>
Sent: Sunday, June 4, 2017 8:49 AM
Subject: Re: Images in source code.

is there anyway to run maven-rat-plugin to make sure ASF licensed assets are *not* being subverted
by salesforce

Apache Rat™ Plugin for Apache Maven – apache-rat:rat<><>
apache-rat:rat. Note:This goal should be used as a Maven report. Full name: org.apache.rat:apache-rat-plugin:0.13-SNAPSHOT:rat.



From: John D. Ament <>
Sent: Saturday, June 3, 2017 9:46 AM
Subject: Re: Images in source code.

On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 8:20 PM Craig Russell <> wrote:

Hi James,

Everything that is not explicitly called out in the top level NOTICE and
LICENSE files are licensed under the Apache 2.0 license.

Adding a file to this directory might mislead people into thinking that
they need to perform more due diligence with other files in other

My advice is to *not* add anything. Let the images be licensed per the
terms the top level LICENSE file.

Agreed.  What we do like to make sure is called out is if there is
provenance that these images came from somewhere else.  If these images
were not created by you and were not already under apache license, then we
would have a concern.


On Jun 2, 2017, at 2:20 PM, James Bognar <>


I haven't found a metadata editor that works yet, so I'll just add a
LICENSE.txt file to the directory.  Hopefully that's enough.

On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 4:48 PM, Josh Elser <> wrote:

On 6/2/17 1:15 PM, James Bognar wrote:

I just added several png files to the source tree of our podling.  I
created them myself.  Are there any best-practices on how to mark
these as
Apache licensed?

I'm not sure of a good way to track this. I'm not sure if png supports
arbitrary metadata which could be edited. Some ways I've seen used
elsewhere to try to better propagate license/ownership:

* Comments on the issue-tracker issue that introduced them citing
origin/source (typically for images that are copied, not created)
* Entry in LICENSE/NOTICE (shouldn't be done unnecessarily, of course)
* A README in the same directory with relevant info

If the images are of the podling's creation, I wouldn't be particularly
worried. The copyright notice on your source-release and LICENSE are
sufficient to inform downstream consumers.

Probably not the answer you're looking for, but hope it helps :)

- Josh

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

James Bognar

Craig L Russell

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

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message