|
David,
As I said in my response yesterday, I
think that the API jar file should be simply licensed under the
EPL-2.0+GPL+CE or APACHE-2.0. I.e. just use the project license.
No, I do not think that the JavaDoc jar
file should also be available under the EFSL. Think of the EFSL as
a binary license that is applied to the final specification. I
don't think there is any utility in adding the EFSL to the
JavaDoc, except as it appears in the final spec document. That is
both the short-term and long-term answer IMO.
Pardon the dumb question, but could
someone explain why anyone would want to get the specification
document from Maven Central? I don't understand the use case.
On 2019-07-30 9:57 p.m., David Blevins
wrote:
This brings up a more important discussion.
OSSRH does not want non-OSS binaries being staged
and published.
We've clearly identified we should not be publishing
the spec PDF there for this reason as it is under the EFSL. In
the future (when there's more time) we can publish EPL versions
to OSSRH and Maven Central like CDI has done.
If the EFSL is being applied to the generated
javadoc.jar file, the same rule must apply.
Do we strictly need the javadoc jar to contain the
EFSL or is the EPL enough? Understandably there might be
different short-term and long-term answers.
One approach:
- Short-term: Just use EPL in the javadoc jar and
good old find-and-replace for the apidoc PR. Long term: yay
tool yet-to-be-written that solves this
This
brings up another
question... As Joakim points out, there does seem to be
some inconsistency
on the licensing requirements for these various jar
files. I think
we have answered the question for the javadoc jar file
and how to include
the EFSL license.
But, what about
the sources jar file? Should that contain the EPL (or
ASL or whatever
is used for development) in the META-INF directory?
And, the main
api jar file... Should that also contain the EPL (or
ASL or whatever
is used for development) in the META-INF directory?
Since we have
so many different teams generating these artifacts, I
wonder if we have
another inconsistency brewing?
---------------------------------------------------
Kevin Sutter
STSM, MicroProfile and Jakarta EE architect
e-mail: sutter@xxxxxxxxxx
Twitter: @kwsutter
phone: tl-553-3620 (office), 507-253-3620 (office)
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kevinwsutter
From:
Bill
Shannon <bill.shannon@xxxxxxxxxx>
To:
JakartaEE
Spec Project Leadership discussions <jakartaee-spec-project-leads@xxxxxxxxxxx>,
Joakim Erdfelt <joakim.erdfelt@xxxxxxxxx>,
"jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx"
<jakarta.ee-spec.committee@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date:
07/30/2019
03:39 PM
Subject:
[EXTERNAL]
Re: [jakartaee-spec-project-leads] License files in
javadoc and sources
artifacts
Sent
by: jakartaee-spec-project-leads-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
The json-api
javadoc jar file is correct.
The doc-files/speclicense.html file is the EFSL license
that's linked to
in the footer of the javadoc pages.
Joakim Erdfelt
wrote on 7/30/19 1:12
PM:
Per the
instructions at https://wiki.eclipse.org/How_to_Prepare_API_Projects_for_the_Jakarta_EE_8_Release
All of the jar
artifacts produced should
have an appropriate license file.
For the spec
artiacts and javadoc artiacts
it's the EFSL (Eclipse Foundation Specification License)
- https://raw.githubusercontent.com/eclipse-ee4j/jakartaee-api/master/licenses/EFSL.html
For the rest of the
artifacts (main artifact
jar/bundle, and its sources classified jar) it's
whatever that project
is licensed at.
So for a typical
jakarta project (with
source) we'll have 3 artifacts for each maven module.
jakarta.<name>-<version>.jar
- main artifact
jakarta.<name>-<version>-sources.jar
- sources classified artifact
jakarta.<name>-<version>-javadoc.jar
- javadoc classified artifact
Getting the license
file into /META-INF/
for the main artifact is easy enough.
So is getting the
license into the sources
classified artifact.
However, getting
the license into the
javadoc classified artifact is a bit tricky.
I'm sure someone
here has figured it
out, but I can't find that project.
I sampled a few
"done" projects
on the "Jakarta EE 8 Release" project at https://github.com/orgs/eclipse-ee4j/projects/15
Here's what I found
when searching sources
classified artifacts from "Done" list ...
$ jar -tvf
jakarta.security.enterprise-api-1.0.2-sources.jar
| grep -Ei "(license|eclipse|efsl)"
$ jar -tvf jakarta.servlet-api-4.0.3-sources.jar | grep
-Ei "(license|eclipse|efsl)"
$ jar -tvf
jakarta.security.enterprise-api-1.0.2-sources.jar | grep
-Ei
"(license|eclipse|efsl)"
$ jar -tvf jakarta.inject-api-1.0-sources.jar | grep -Ei
"(license|eclipse|efsl)"
$ jar -tvf jakarta.jms-api-2.0.3-sources.jar | grep -Ei
"(license|eclipse|efsl)"
$ jar -tvf jakarta.json-api-1.1.6-sources.jar | grep -Ei
"(license|eclipse|efsl)"
35084 Fri Jul 19 19:29:04 CDT 2019 META-INF/LICENSE.md
Here's what I found
when searching javadoc
classified artifacts from "Done" list ...
$ jar -tvf
jakarta.servlet-api-4.0.3-javadoc.jar
| grep -Ei "(license|eclipse|efsl)"
$ jar -tvf
jakarta.security.enterprise-api-1.0.2-javadoc.jar | grep
-Ei
"(license|eclipse|efsl)"
$ jar -tvf jakarta.inject-api-1.0-javadoc.jar | grep -Ei
"(license|eclipse|efsl)"
$ jar -tvf jakarta.jms-api-2.0.3-javadoc.jar | grep -Ei
"(license|eclipse|efsl)"
$ jar -tvf jakarta.json-api-1.1.6-javadoc.jar | grep -Ei
"(license|eclipse|efsl)"
3250 Fri Jul 19 19:35:18 CDT 2019
doc-files/speclicense.html
The json-api
project has figured out
how to get a license file into their javadoc classified
jar, but not in
the correct place.
But json-api did
figure out how to get
the /META-INF/LICENSE.md correctly.
I'm reaching out to
find out if another
project has figured this out yet for javadoc classified
artifacts?
Thanks,
- Joakim Erdfelt
(Jakarta WebSocket)
|
