[
Date Prev][
Date Next][
Thread Prev][
Thread Next][
Date Index][
Thread Index]
[
List Home]
|
Re: [ee4j-pmc] Questions about licenses
|
Dmitry Kornilov wrote on 7/10/19 1:51 AM:
> Hi,
>
> I have several questions related to project licenses. My goal is to clarify the usage of licenses and create samples which can be used as a reference.
>
> We have two common use cases. The boilerplate spec is added using instructions from here: https://wiki.eclipse.org/How_to_Prepare_API_Projects_to_Jakarta_EE_8_Release.
>
> 1. Project is licensed under EPC 2.0 & GPL + c/p (ex. JSONB).
>
> Project structure:
>
> project_root
> spec
> LICENSE -> EPL 2.0
> pom.xml -> EPL 2.0 & GPL with c/p
> LICENSE.md -> EPL 2.0 & GPL with c/p
> pom.xml -> EPL 2.0 & GPL with c/p
>
> Where is an inconsistency between licence in spec/pom.xml (EPL & GPL+c/p) and spec/LICENSE (EPL) in the same directory. Is it fine?
Yes, it can be confusing when there are multiple licenses that apply to
different parts of a repository. I resorted to adding an explainer to
the Jakarta Mail web site:
https://eclipse-ee4j.github.io/javamail/JakartaMail-License
> 2. Project is licensed under EDL 1.0 (ex. JWS):
>
> Project structure:
>
> project_root
> spec
> LICENSE -> EPL 2.0
> pom.xml -> EPL 2.0 & GPL with c/p
> LICENSE.md -> EDL 1.0
> pom.xml -> EDL 1.0
>
> Here is the same inconsistence as in the first use case plus an inconsistence between licenses in spec directory (EPL) and a project license (EDL). How to deal with it?
Many of our projects will use multiple licenses. I don't know if we
need to update something at the Eclipse project level to make that clear.
> There is NOTICE.md file in each project which contains project license information. Example from JWS:
>
> Declared Project Licenses
>
> This program and the accompanying materials are made available under the terms of the Eclipse Distribution License v. 1.0 which is available at http://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/edl-v10.php.
>
> SPDX-License-Identifier: BSD-3-Clause
>
> Shall it include some information that content of spec directory is licensed under EPL?
More generally, does it need to list all the different licenses used for
different parts of the repository? I guess this is a question for Wayne...
