[incubator-kie-issues-1616] notice file for drools is not correct #6153
Conversation
|
@LightGuard , as mentioned in apache/incubator-kie-issues#1616 (comment)
Could you involve someone from mentors/IPMC for review? |
|
@pjfanning would you mind taking a look at this, please? |
|
@davsclaus and @oscerd it would be good to get your review here too. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My understanding from the ASF release policy document, we should be okay including the licenses as is done in this pull request. I think it is more common to see it in one single file, but it is also okay to have it in a different file, with a pointer (which I think we need to add).
When a package bundles code under several licenses, the LICENSE file MUST contain details of all these licenses. For each component which is not Apache licensed, details of the component MUST be appended to the LICENSE file. The component license itself MUST either be appended or else stored elsewhere in the package with a pointer to it from the LICENSE file, e.g. if the license is long.
DISCLAIMER-BINARY
Outdated
| drools-docs/ui-bundle/ui-bundle.zip : antora ui-bundle resources. For example, js and svg. See LICENSE-BINARY file |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm wondering if we drop the docs stuff from the releases all together. @porcelli what do you think?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
+1 for dropping drools-docs by the release CI, so we can reduce license concerns and avoid future issues.
LICENSE-BINARY
Outdated
| This section summarizes those components and their licenses. See licenses-binary/ | ||
| for text of these licenses. | ||
|
|
||
| Mozilla Public License 2.0 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Shouldn't we be including the license text here too, or at the very least a link to the license?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yes - any non Apache license - we need its text including any customisations like copyright statements
There was a problem hiding this comment.
could we please list the files that are affected by these licenses?
I found:
incubator-kie-drools/drools-docs/supplemental-ui/css/search.css
incubator-kie-drools/drools-docs/supplemental-ui/js/search-ui.js
|
would love to hear your feedback here @pjfanning |
LICENSE
Outdated
| Mozilla Public License 2.0 | ||
| ----------- | ||
|
|
||
| drools-docs/supplemental-ui/css/search.css |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
can you include the text of any non Apache Licenses?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@pjfanning you mean copy here the whole license text from the file? basically a copy-n-paste from here https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/MPL/2.0/
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@pjfanning note that part of this PR we have other files like LICENSE-search-ui.txt - so you suggest we remove those files and add everything here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
if you are not including the text directly here - you will need to provide the location of the file to check.
I'm not sure having separate files will be popular.
In most ASF source releases, we have one LICENSE file and maybe one directory with 3rd party licenses.
KIE source release has many subdirs - with different git repos in each subdir, each with its own license - and now these subdirs can have more subdirs with 3rd party libraries. This level of splitting up of the license data is kind of unprecedented.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@pjfanning do you happen to have an example of license that has more than one license? sorry to insist and bother... but I'm trying to be assertive and avoid a RC5 :D
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this looks very good, however I'd love to hear from @pjfanning - as I'm not experienced to properly evaluate
There was a problem hiding this comment.
great job @tkobayas, thank you for digging into this!
however based on @pjfanning input, we need make this slightly better
|
Thank you for reviewing! Moved I hope this addresses the suggested points. Please review, thanks! @pjfanning @porcelli @LightGuard |
| ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | ||
| for drools-decisiontables/src/main/java/org/drools/decisiontable/parser/csv/CsvLineParser.java | ||
|
|
||
| Inner logic adapted from a C++ original that was Copyright (C) 1999 | ||
| Lucent Technologies Excerpted from 'The Practice of Programming' by Brian | ||
| Kernighan and Rob Pike. | ||
|
|
||
| Included by permission of the http://tpop.awl.com/ web site, which says: | ||
| "You may use this code for any purpose, as long as you leave the | ||
| copyright notice and book citation attached." |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I fixed one more issue, which was pointed at in https://lists.apache.org/thread/nrq50szwx37doopb23wyq33v0t3bbccg . CsvLineParser.java has this copyright, so removed Apache license header. This statement doesn't seem to meet with known licenses, but I think it fits in the LICENSE file. Let me know if this should be handled in another way.
FYI) http://tpop.awl.com/ no longer exists.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This could cause some trouble. I found the book online but I couldn't find any reference to this permission bit.
https://kremlin.cc/rob.pdf
We might need to bring this up on the legal discussion JIRA. https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/LEGAL/issues
In the end of the day, the path of least resistance might be to find another CSV parser. E.g. commons-csv
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you for the suggestion, @pjfanning
I have found this statement in this store site ( https://www.informit.com/store/practice-of-programming-9780201615869 ). Click "Downloads" tab. It contains the statement You may use this code for any purpose, as long as you leave the copyright notice and book citation attached..
Shall I open a JIRA in https://issues.apache.org/jira/projects/LEGAL/issues ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Could you raise the JIRA? Finding the statement on that web site is very helpful though.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@pjfanning @porcelli I filed https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-689 Feel free to add comments on it.
| Copyright Red Hat, Inc. and/or its affiliates.. All Rights Reserved. | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@pjfanning it's not entirely clear to me, but isn't expected that the CSV parser copyright info moved here? (or it's ok to be on LICENSE file)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
My experience has been bad with the cases like this where the code is not explicitly licensed or explicitly placed in the public domain. If https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html or existing LEGAL JIRAs don't cover it, it is best to get it checked by the Legal team.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
k, but as this would be a big enough change for the immediate 10.0.0 release... I'd assume this wouldn't be a blocker...
In the meantime.. I'm just wondering if the NOTICE file wouldn't be more appropriated to host the copyright? As this seems to be a good example to relocated copyright.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we can open the LEGAL issue but press on. It is probably not a blocker to wait for the agreed answer.
The LICENSE needs to mention this usage so I'm not sure it is that useful to also include the copyright in the NOTICE but others might have another opinion.
|
@tkobayas I don't think the -BINARY files are needed in current form. As it only covers the search-ui thing that is used only by the docs module, which we don't distribute in any binary format. @pjfanning thoughts? |
|
@porcelli Thanks. Probably I misunderstood the purpose of |
|
ui-bundle.zip contains javascript, svg, font, css, hbs (html template). I wrote that in
Is this a blocker to the 10.0.0 release? @pjfanning If no, we would drop the |
Can we exclude it from the sources zip and come back later? It could easily attract a -1 vote by including it. And in longer run, it needs to be removed and the various source files in the archive should be checked in explicitly. If you need to zip thm up when you are building from source, that's ok - that should be easy to add to your build scripting. |
…ed in source distoribution
|
Okay, I removed For 10.0.x, I'll raise a PR to remove |
|
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-689 So the current PR seems to be good. |
|
@pjfanning @LightGuard @porcelli If this PR is in a good shape under the current situation, please approve and merge, thanks! |
…ache#6153) * [incubator-kie-issues-1616] notice file for drools is not correct * fix .rat-excludes * consolidate LICENSE files to single LICENSE file * fixed missing license header * fix CsvLineParser license * exclude drools-docs related licenses, because they will not be included in source distoribution
…ache#6153) * [incubator-kie-issues-1616] notice file for drools is not correct * fix .rat-excludes * consolidate LICENSE files to single LICENSE file * fixed missing license header * fix CsvLineParser license * exclude drools-docs related licenses, because they will not be included in source distoribution
Issue:
NOTICEfile contains only Apache KIE. Bundled third-party components don't have their ownNOTICEfile. So nothing to add.NOTICEfile, soNOTICE-BINARYis removedNOTICE-BINARYis moved toDISCLAIMER-BINARY(mimicking https://github.com/apache/incubator-stormcrawler/blob/stormcrawler-3.1.0/DISCLAIMER-BINARIES.txt)LICENSE-Apache-2.0.txttoLICENSELICENSEhas list of bundled third-party components with their license and file pathsLICENSE-BINARYhas list of bundled binary third-party components with their license and file pathslicensesdirectory contains LICENSE files of the bundled third-party componentslicenses-binarydirectory contains LICENSE files of the bundled binary third-party components