incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ignasi Barrera <>
Subject Re: the case of the maven wrapper
Date Thu, 14 Feb 2019 08:15:44 GMT
In the particular case of the "" file, I would
say it is OK not to mention it in the LICENSE/NOTICE files, as per the
existing policy [1]. The project does not contain a NOTICE file, so there
is nothing to propagate there, and policy says that if the bundled
dependency is already ASLv2, there is no need to modify the LICENSE file.

IMO, it is fine that the Incubator makes the podlings aware of the "for
completeness it is useful to list the products and their versions" part,
but just a matter of convenience. The policy is clear, though: it should
not be a requirement, and thus the Incubator should enforce that as such
(I'm not pretending to say it's doing ti now; just dumping my views).

We can enter the debate about fairness, ethics, etc, and mentioning
provenance in the license (but hey, if an ASLv2 licensed project wants to
enforce it, it can provide its own NOTICE file). In the end, what is not
mandatory in policy should not be a requirement to be implemented by
podlings, but a choice of every single community.

My $0.02



On Thu, 14 Feb 2019 at 08:29, Justin Mclean <>

> Hi,
> > If we all say fine.. let's just throw more paperwork at it, I would ask
> you
> > to help draft a line for the NOTICE of what we would do. suppose we would
> > also have to do this for gradle etc.
> You would need to do this for any 3rd party file bundled with a release
> and yes sometimes this is complex and takes time. See for example Apache
> Newt. [1]
> > So basically if we accept that the new norm is this level of detail on
> > incidental files,
> It’s a 3rd party file not an incidental file and the ASF has policy around
> what to do when including 3rd party files which a (P)PMC and releases need
> to comply with. [2][3]
> To comply however is a simple change that needs to be made once to clearly
> inculcate the IP province and license of that file to users of the projects.
> > would it be "this includes source generated by the takari maven plugin"?
> > and of course if we say this, the next cruft is explaining gradle etc.
> If you don’t know what to do ask you mentors or the IPMC for help. If you
> disagree with advice given then clarify on legal-discuss.
> Thanks,
> Justin
> 1.
> 2.
> 3.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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