uima-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Thilo Goetz <twgo...@gmx.de>
Subject Re: RC0 for uimacpp distribution
Date Thu, 03 May 2007 06:33:49 GMT
Hi Eddie,

Eddie Epstein wrote:
> Thilo,
> Thanks for looking this over. Please see some questions below
>> * LICENSE file needs the variables filled in.
> Is this related to the comment about appending other licenses to this file?
> If not I am at a loss.

Sorry, please ignore that.  I was confused.

>> * The APR headers still use the old 1.1 Apache license.  Is this the
>> latest version of APR?  I'm not suggesting you change the license, to
>> the contrary.  Just wondering if there is a later version available
>> that's already under the 2.0 license.
> Good point. Will move to a more recent version of APR.
>> * For the release voting, we'll need to say how the documentation is
>> automatically generated with doxygen (because there are no license
>> headers).
> The doxygen generated html identifies itself as being generated by doxygen
> at the bottom of every page. I looked for information on the doxygen
> site about other
> requirements to acknowledge doxygen, but could not find any. Can you
> say more here?

What I meant was, when we start the [VOTE] thread, it would make sense 
to point this out to people (so they know that these files don't need 
any Apache license headers).  Alternatively, we could create an 
annotated RAT report like I did for the Java version where we explain that.

I won't have time to look at the source distribution this week, I'm 
afraid.  Hopefully next week.  Sorry about that.


>> * uimacpp/include/uima/msg.h and uimacpp/include/uima/msgstrtab.h have
>> no license headers.
> Fixed.
>> * The licenses do not go into separate subdirectories.  Instead, all
>> licenses are appended to the LICENSE file.  In addition, in the NOTICES
>> file, you spell out what software you include that's not Apache
>> licensed, and under which license (which is then in the LICENSE file).
>> You'll need to do that for the ICU, and I guess Xeces and APR, because
>> they are 1.x licensed.  We should ask on incubator-general about the ICU
>> license, but I assume it's ok because Xerces is also using it.
> The xerces release here is already 2.0 licensed, and APR will be too.
> Will ask the incubator-general about ICU.
>> That's it for today, I'll take another look tomorrow, and hopefully also
>> at the source distribution.
> Thanks again,
> Eddie

View raw message