First release of Apache Baremaps #535
Conversation
bchapuis
force-pushed
the
492-release
branch
7 times, most recently
from
ac15117
to
ec78512
Compare
bchapuis
force-pushed
the
492-release
branch
2 times, most recently
from
1d4c6d5
to
f159153
Compare
|
Please retry analysis of this Pull-Request directly on SonarCloud. |
bchapuis
force-pushed
the
492-release
branch
15 times, most recently
from
c4bb1b9
to
4bc74b7
Compare
|
Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!
|
NOTICE
Outdated
| This product includes protocol buffers definitions copied from OSMPBF. | ||
| Copyright (c) 2010 Scott A. Crosby. <[email protected]> | ||
| MIT License. | ||
| Please visit the following URLs for the licensing information: | ||
| https://github.com/openstreetmap/OSM-binary/issues/18 | ||
| https://github.com/openstreetmap/OSM-binary/pull/35 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Since it uses the MIT License, you don't need to modify the NOTICE.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As the discussion regarding the licensing of OSMPBF is a bit scattered on the web (the original version in the osmosis project has not been updated by Scott Crosby), I wanted to keep track of it.
NOTICE
Outdated
| This product includes protocol buffers definitions copied from OSMPBF. | ||
| Copyright (c) 2010 Scott A. Crosby. <[email protected]> | ||
| MIT License. | ||
| Please visit the following URLs for the licensing information: | ||
| https://github.com/openstreetmap/OSM-binary/issues/18 | ||
| https://github.com/openstreetmap/OSM-binary/pull/35 | ||
|
|
||
| This product includes software derived from Palantir Streams. | ||
| Copyright 2015 Palantir Technologies, Inc. | ||
| Apache License, Version 2.0 | ||
| Please visit the following URL for the full text of the Palantir license: | ||
| https://github.com/palantir/streams/blob/develop/LICENSE | ||
|
|
||
| This product includes software derived from Planetiler. | ||
| Copyright 2021 Michael Barry and Planetiler Contributors. | ||
| Apache License, Version 2.0 | ||
| Please visit the following URL for the full text of the Planetiler license: | ||
| https://github.com/onthegomap/planetiler/blob/main/LICENSE |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You seem to have forgotten to declare it in the LICENSE file.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should I copy the NOTICE in the LICENSE file? Isn't it redundant?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In the LICENSE file, we usually just have a short summary
https://github.com/apache/skywalking/blob/60b061f5f9f48a7dd0aa238f9218503c74882ad0/LICENSE#L215_L227
Here are docs https://infra.apache.org/licensing-howto.html#bundled-vs-non-bundled
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If you are source code dependent and the dependent code used license is the AL2 license, the NOTICE file needs to contain the NOTICE of the other party.
Except for the AL2 license, I have not seen other licenses that require modifying the NOTICE file.
LICENSE
Outdated
|
|
||
| END OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS | ||
|
|
||
| APPENDIX: How to apply the Apache License to your work. | ||
|
|
||
| To apply the Apache License to your work, attach the following | ||
| boilerplate notice, with the fields enclosed by brackets "[]" | ||
| replaced with your own identifying information. (Don't include | ||
| the brackets!) The text should be enclosed in the appropriate | ||
| comment syntax for the file format. We also recommend that a | ||
| file or class name and description of purpose be included on the | ||
| same "printed page" as the copyright notice for easier | ||
| identification within third-party archives. | ||
|
|
||
| Copyright [yyyy] [name of copyright owner] | ||
|
|
||
| Licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the "License"); | ||
| you may not use this file except in compliance with the License. | ||
| You may obtain a copy of the License at | ||
|
|
||
| http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 | ||
|
|
||
| Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing, software | ||
| distributed under the License is distributed on an "AS IS" BASIS, | ||
| WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY KIND, either express or implied. | ||
| See the License for the specific language governing permissions and | ||
| limitations under the License. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we usually choose to keep it.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I removed the notice to address one of @julianhyde's comment. I may have misunderstood it.
|
Do not include binary packages in source releases, I see we have a In addition, |
Are you checking the baremaps-0.7.1-rc3-incubating-src.zip or the Source code (ZIP) archive. The former shouldn't include mvnw. The latter is automatically generated by GitHub and I haven't been able to disable this feature yet. |
Sorry, my mistake~ I looked directly at your code, not the source package, please ignore me. |
No problem, I think I should have been clearer, because this issue has been reported several time with the rc1 and I wasn't sure how I should handled it. |
|
Kudos, SonarCloud Quality Gate passed!
|
|
@CalvinKirs I tried to integrate your comments in the latest commit. I also took some time check the license associated with the test data (these data files will need to be replaced at some point during the incubation). As mentioned, I think it makes sense to keep the link to the discussions regarding the relicensing of OSMPBF to MIT as it was originally released under the LGPL. |
I'll do a full check later, but it might be late as I've been busy lately. |
No hurry, there is a lot of work ahead to replace all the licensed data from the tests. If I understand things correctly, the DISCLAIMER-WIP allows us to publish releases, even if we are not fully conform to Apache's guideline yet. Is that right? Our latest release is outdated and I think it would be good to publish a new one. |
yes, If you use the DISCLAIMER-WIP way, you only need to include the standard NOTICE, LICENSE, and DISCLAIMER-WIP. |
bchapuis
force-pushed
the
main
branch
2 times, most recently
from
e987d6e
to
d934b19
Compare
No description provided.