Thanks, Ed. Note that the M7 is the target for these changes...
Kenn
On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 12:21 PM, Ed Willink <ed@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Hi Kenn
I've already updated twice. I will do one last update at RC2.
Regards
Ed
On 21/04/2010 16:22, Kenn Hussey wrote:
Project leads, please take the necessary action for your
projects based on David's email below. Note that this involves updating
all of your feature.properties, license.html, and notice.html files. As
far as I understand it, the contents of your license.html and
notice.html files should be identical (based on the new one attached to
the bug referenced below).
Thanks,
Kenn
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: David M Williams<david_williams@xxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 10:33 AM
Subject: Fw: [cross-project-issues-dev] Remember to update your
feature.properties file, to use consistent licensing text
To: cross-project-issues-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
In case anyone hasn't noticed, the
Eclipse
Foundation has issued a new SUA document.
So, for those of you who acted
quickly
to this request on 4/7, then you'll be
well practiced to easily do it
again?
:/
And, for the rest of you, then
you've
just been reinforced for procrastinating. :)
Sorry for the churn. The new SUA is
not radically different, but has some
important clarifications about
implications
of Eclipse's provisioning system.
Well, you know ... important for
legal
reasons, hence required for us.
And, in case you are wondering, yes
it was considered to "push back" on
this request, but I think there is
just
enough time to accommodate it, without
endangering our Simultaneous Release
so best to take advantage of
the timing to get current and
consistent.
Much thanks,
----- Forwarded by
David
M Williams/Raleigh/IBM on 04/21/2010 10:16 AM -----
As I'm sure you are all aware, a new Helios Requirement this year is to
use consistent license text, so the "license acceptance" dialog
can be made more meaningful and easier to use.
And, that's _exactly_ consistent license text ... same year, same text,
same capitalization. (I've heard consecutive white space doesn't
matter,
but why push it?).
So, yes, this does means almost all of us have to change.
Of course, this applies to those features that use the Eclipse SUA and
if someone was shipping a feature in Helios that didn't use that, then
you wouldn't want to change yours .... but, then I'd wonder why it was
in Helios?
For reference, see http://eclipse.org/legal/guidetolegaldoc.php
for details on the legally required documents ... but, this Helios
requirement
goes beyond the minimum requirement and gets us all to use the exact
same
text, so the software can tell when its really the same license.
If you try to get the "standard text" from the website, you need
to be careful to get the plain HTML and ASCII versions, make sure
there's
no web encoding conversion errors, etc., so probably easiest to get
from
the bugzilla entry.
One disturbing angle that's come up, while some checked if we all use
the
same text, is that some of you are not using ANY (yet). That is really
a big "no no" and would be a "stop ship" issue, if
found "at the last minute" (as far as I know,
it should be a stop ship issue even for milestones, etc ... but, I'm
not
here to judge ... yet).
So, let's try to get this all corrected for M7, so we don't have to
monkey
around with this routine level of detail for release candidates. Plus,
if you fix yours for M7, that'll make all the slackers really standout
in M7 and we can more easily see who they are :)
