[Bug 1200768] Review Request: takari-archiver - Takari Archiver

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1200768



--- Comment #4 from Mikolaj Izdebski <mizdebsk@xxxxxxxxxx> ---
(In reply to Alec Leamas from comment #3)
> Mikolaj: I see basically three issues with this package.
> 
> The first is licensing. I cannot find any sign of a EPL or other license in
> any README, pom.xml or source files (besides in FileMode.java, below).

POM files use inheritance to avoid information duplication. pom.xml of
takari-archiver specifies its <parent> as io.takari:takari:15 (see parent Po:
http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/io/takari/takari/15/takari-15.pom), which defines
license as "The Eclipse Public License, Version 1.0". Due to POM inheritance
this information is effectively part of takari-archiver POM.

> Furthermore, you download a license file separate from upstream which
> normally not is OK. 
> 
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:LicensingGuidelines?rd=Packaging/
> LicensingGuidelines#License_Text
> 
> Please provide more info on what grounds you are applying the EPL license to
> this software, possibly after contacting upstream.

In the past I tried working with the same upstream (Takari/Tesla, it's the
same) - I contacted them more than once and they either refused to include
licensing texts in their repos or not responded at all. They said that
licensing information it POM itself in enough in their opinion.

I had to add license text to RPM package because it is required by EPL license.
Quoting from the license, "When the Program is made available in source code
form [...] a copy of this Agreement [EPL] must be included with each copy of
the Program", see section 3 of EPL. This case is explicitly allowed by
guidelines linked by you.

> The other is that the jar files are not removed in %prep:
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Java#Pre-
>   built_JAR_files_.2F_Other_bundled_software

Not a big issue IMO (these are used for tests only and tests are skipped), but
I will remove bundled JARs from SRPM.

> The third is that the BSD licensed file FileMode.java seems to be a bundled
> copy of
> http://git.eclipse.org/c/jgit/jgit.git/diff/org.eclipse.jgit/src/org/eclipse/
> jgit/lib/FileMode.java. This is just a single file, but I still think  you
> need an FPC exemption for it.

Good catch. I will try to unbundle parts of jgit.

-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
You are always notified about changes to this product and component
_______________________________________________
package-review mailing list
package-review@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/package-review





[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]