james-server-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stefano Bagnara <apa...@bago.org>
Subject Re: [jsieve] Any more TODO before 0.2 release?
Date Wed, 18 Jun 2008 16:05:05 GMT
Jukka Zitting ha scritto:
> Hi,
> 
> On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 4:31 PM, Stefano Bagnara <apache@bago.org> wrote:
>> I'm simply saying that I agree with David that each package should have its
>> own specific NOTICE/LICENSE but IMHO at the moment it doesn't worth the
>> effort until maven will give us a better solution.
> 
> Fair enough.
> 
> AFAIK the current Maven tools are not good enough (even on a design
> level, for example the POM has no concept of copyright attributions)
> for automating the generation of proper NOTICE and LICENSE files.
> 
> BR,
> 
> Jukka Zitting

Good point!

It currently uses the template:
"developed by $organization.name" that most time is a way to express who 
is the copyright holder, but this is not always true and "developed by" 
is not the same as a "copyright" statement.

For sure it would be better if the pom.xml allowed people to declare 
also who is the copyright owner somewhere.

Stefano

PS: I'll forward this to dev@maven so someone can hear us arguing ;-)
http://markmail.org/message/udrprcgvx5r57p3j
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MASSEMBLY-330


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: server-dev-unsubscribe@james.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: server-dev-help@james.apache.org


Mime
View raw message