Skip to main content

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] [List Home]
[] RE: Example for feature.xml ?

Hello Bjorn, Hello Janet,
Below is what I intend to do in order to comply with the licensing rules.
Please comment on the points listed below until tomorrow morning so
I can go forward without doing duplicate work.
If you approve of my procedure, this could become an example for others
so it might be in everybody's interest to get this sorted out real soon.
Based on the following three items I have identified where DSDP-TM does
not yet fully implement the Legal policies:
and based on some research on what others do, this is what I want to do:
1. license.html should include full text of all licenses.
    I will not do this but rather do the following:
    Full text of applicable licenses (epl-v10.html; Apache licenses in some cases)
    will be shipped in the feature, but shipped as a separate file as it has always been.
    The license.html file will include a hyperlink to the downloaded static copy of the
    referenced licenses.
    I do NOT want to merge it into license.html, because license.html gets
    visible only after installing the product, and at that time a reference to the
    downloaded static copy is just as good as having it part of the license.html.
    The advantage of the downloaded static copy is that it's more easily identifiable
    as being a real verbatim copy of the original license.
2. license.html must have a bulleted table-of-contents at the top
    I will add the bulleted table-of contents. It will look as follows:
    Feature License Table of Contents
    This feature is licensed under the following terms:
        * Eclipse Foundation Software User Agreement
        * Eclipse Public License v1.0
    Below this table of contents, the existing Foundation Software
    User Agreement will be shown. I'm currently unsure if I'd like
    to include a verbatim copy, or with the section "SOME OF
    of licenses removed.
    The table of contents will hyperlink as follows:
       * User Agreement -> hyperlink to lower down in the file
       * EPL -> hyperlink to static local copy of epl-v10.html
3. feature.xml must also contain the same bulleted table-of-contents
    I will not add it to feature.xml but rather to
    Since this is for the Update Manager feature update license,
    the hyperlinks must be different than in the license.html file
    because at that time, the static copies are not yet available.
    So, the table of contents will look like this:
    Feature License Table of Contents
    This feature is licensed under the following terms:
        * Eclipse Foundation Software User Agreement
           (See below)
        * Eclipse Public License v1.0
    If any of the hyperlinks mentioned above does not work for you, you
    will get a static copy of the license installed when you download the
    feature. Please check the feature's license.html file after downloading.
    Rationale: I do not want to copy the license text into
    everywhere. This is for people who want to read the licenses before they
    download stuff from update manager.
    So, they do have internet access at this time, and the chance that they
    are able to go to the links for reading the lienses is big. For cases where
    it doesn't work, they can download and inspect the license after downloding

Martin Oberhuber
Wind River Systems, Inc.
Target Management Project Lead, DSDP PMC Member


From: [] On Behalf Of Bjorn Freeman-Benson
Sent: Friday, June 01, 2007 11:53 PM
Subject: Re: [] Example for feature.xml ? (was:EM legal documentation pledge)

Ed, Martin,
I can sympathize with your frustrations although I cannot entirely relieve them. My problem is that I am not the Eclipse Legal decision maker - at best I am a go-between between you all and Janet. In that I am not perfect (and boy am I aware of that).

However, (to quote the Rocky Horror Picture Show), "time is fleeting", so let me make some decisions anyway:
I do understand your concerns about copying the same stuff
over and over again. Especially given that your small component
features are typically not directly visible to the user because
they are included in larger overall features.
*I* think it is perfectly acceptable not to copy the same stuff over and over again. Whether Janet agrees, I cannot say. If I were you (or if I were you listening to me), I would do what I think is correct, send an email to Janet (cc Bjorn) saying "here is what I am assuming and what I have done".
I'm still pretty confused though:
  * The "Eclipse Foundation Software User Agreement" pointed
    to by Bjorn is a *.php file and not *.html so I cannot 
    use it directly:
I just did "view source" and then copied the source.
      I find this BAD, BAD, BAD and I'm not going to adopt it;
      for Webmaster / Legal to fix it
Thanks for finding that - I've checked in a fix.
  * Now my license.html does have a bulleted list as it always
    had, but it references many more licenses than are in my
    concrete feature.
    So, if I remove some from the bulleted list it's not the 
    original agreement any more; 
That's ok; seems reasonable to me.
furthermore, the EPL is included
    in my feature as epl-v10.html so why should I add yet another
    copy of it to the license.html?
I don't know. It doesn't make sense to me. If I were you, I'd use my philosophy from above: do what you think is correct and tell Janet what you have done.

- Bjorn

Back to the top