commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Curt Arnold <>
Subject Re: apache commons-* -sources.jar
Date Sat, 02 Feb 2008 21:25:40 GMT

On Feb 2, 2008, at 2:08 PM, nicolas de loof wrote:

LICENSE, NOTICE and other *.txt files (release note, readme ...) have  
been added at jar root.
> I can rebuild the jars with those files in META-INF if required.
> The script was not designed for reproductibility but to avoid  
> manually browse on repo, download, unzip and so on..
> Here is the code. It is not portable (based on my computer path and  
> tools) and produces on System.out DOS commands to get executed. Some  
> downloaded artifacts also required some folder name fix as they  
> didn't follow other commons-* conventions.
> I'm OK to publish it under Apache license ;-)

This discussion should move to the mailing  
list, since the Commons PMC is responsible for whatever is released  
for that project.  The thread has been cross-posted between 
, and  I'm cross- 
posting to, but this should be the last post on  
that list until the issue is resolved in the commons PMC.

The one -sources.jar that I looked at commons-beanutil-1.6-sources.jar  
did not have a NOTICE file anywhere in the release.  It did have a  
LICENSE.txt in the root directory, but that was a ASL 1.1, not ASL 2.0.

In addition, the source files in that release do not adhere to the ASF  
Source Header and Copyright Notice Policy to which all ASF releases  
created after November 1. 2006 must comply.

As such, the sources.jar would not be acceptable in a new release.  I  
don't think that there would be an exception for a new repackaging of  
a prior release, but I'd like to see that checked against legal- 
discuss or board@apache, but that is the Commons PMC's responsibility.

My take would be:

a) A sources repackaging of a commons release that adheres to the ASF  
Source Header Policy is achievable.  I'd prefer to see it done with  
something much more portable (Apache Ant would be my choice).  There  
should be some automated check for proper Source Headers and presence  
of NOTICE and LICENSE.  The artifacts should be posted (as the current  
ones have been) and a formal vote called on the  After a successful conclusion of that vote  
(72 hours elapsed, 3 +1's from PMC members, et al), then the  
candidates could be copied to the rsync master.

b) Releases that predate or otherwise don't adhere to the ASF Source  
Header Policy should not have retroactive sources.jar releases.  You  
can't change the source to change the notice and still be consistent  
with the previous release and you can't release anything new (at least  
in my opinion) that does not conform to the current ASF release  
policies.  If you really want to get the sources to a project that has  
non-conforming source code, then you should do the sources.jar as part  
of a new complete release even if the only change is the source  
headers.  Again that should be subject to a standard release vote.

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

View raw message