Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Include, link and clarify the license in final JAR files #26

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

JaroslavTulach
Copy link
Contributor

@JaroslavTulach JaroslavTulach commented Apr 26, 2021

Due to a typo, the LICENSE.txt file wasn't included in the final JAR files. Fixed in 722accd. The README.md has been updated to link to the LICENSE.txt and clarify the license applies to the generated JAR files.

@jtulach jtulach force-pushed the jtulach/LicenseAndNotice branch from f87ec76 to 80e645b Compare April 26, 2021 06:18
@matthiasblaesing
Copy link
Contributor

I just saw this, after I submitted #27 - first: Thank you for following up with this fix, its good to see this taken upstream.

I think fixing the license in the binary is the clearer approach. It was shown, that nb-javac falls completely under the CPE, so why not state the fact in the license. That way there is no need to discuss whether or not a clarification in a README file has any binding value for a LICENSE file.

@JaroslavTulach
Copy link
Contributor Author

Matthias wrote:

I think fixing the license in the binary is the clearer approach... why not state the fact in the license?

Changing a license text means introducing completely new license! There already is too many open source licenses and adding another one isn't going to make anything simpler. I prefer simple readme change and inclusion of the license in the generated JAR file.

Thanks Akhilesh for approving my changes, however I am not a committer/owner/maintainer of this repository. I need your help to merge this PR. Thanks in advance for your help!

@singh-akhilesh
Copy link
Contributor

Matthias wrote:

I think fixing the license in the binary is the clearer approach... why not state the fact in the license?

Changing a license text means introducing completely new license! There already is too many open source licenses and adding another one isn't going to make anything simpler. I prefer simple readme change and inclusion of the license in the generated JAR file.

Thanks Akhilesh for approving my changes, however I am not a committer/owner/maintainer of this repository. I need your help to merge this PR. Thanks in advance for your help!

Hi Jaroslav, Currently we are only accepting changes from the commit "Including LICENSE.txt in the JAR files (722accd)" from this PR and it will be cherry pick. Another commit "Confirming Classpath exception applies to the produced binaries" needs some more discussion, so this will be pick-up at later stage.

@JaroslavTulach
Copy link
Contributor Author

Thank you Akhilesh. If you want to merge just 722accd for now, please feel free to do it. According to checking out PRs it should be enough to:

$ git checkout master
$ git fetch origin pull/26/head:ThrowOneChangeAway
$ git merge 722accd

Then we can continue discussing the readme change.

@singh-akhilesh
Copy link
Contributor

Thank you Akhilesh. If you want to merge just 722accd for now, please feel free to do it. According to checking out PRs it should be enough to:

$ git checkout master
$ git fetch origin pull/26/head:ThrowOneChangeAway
$ git merge 722accd

Then we can continue discussing the readme change.

Merged changes for the commit: 722accd in master successfully.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants