www-repository mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Gilles Scokart" <gscok...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: POM licensing
Date Tue, 02 Oct 2007 10:11:42 GMT
2007/10/2, Stefano Bagnara <apache@bago.org>:
> Daniel Kulp ha scritto:
> > Well, I'm not so sure a "released" pom is considered source.   There was
> > a discussion about something similar in Geronimo in regards to the Sun
> > schemas.   Are they source or more of a binary "contract" and not source
> > that a user would/should be interested in modifying.
> >
> > In the poms case, the release plugin does modify them.  Thus, are they
> > considered "generated artifacts"?   Generated artifacts could fall into
> > Category B.
> Some of the poms submitted have been written from scratch by the
> submitter and not generated, so (at least in this case) they are sources.

Also, some of us (reposiroty users) are building an internal company
repository.  Most of the time, the meta data are just a copy of the one
taken on the central repository.  But sometimes, we modify it.  In that
scénario it is certainly not a binary.


View raw message