On Thu, May 29, 2008 at 12:58 AM, Stefano Bagnara <apa...@bago.org> wrote:
Craig L Russell ha scritto:
I don't have any problem with depending on a CC licensed artifact, but I'm
troubled by the notion that an artifact would be installed into a Maven
repository by "not the author".
I had big issues with the fact that pom.xml in maven repository have no
license headers. Our PMC voted down redistributing some of them because of
this.
It should be enforced that any uploaded pom.xml include a license header to
specify the license for the pom itself.
Unfortunately most pom.xml in the current repository do not have the license
header and we don't even know who hold the copyright for that files, AFAIK.
Apart from the description of the project, which is usually copied
from the project website if it's even there, I wonder how much
copyright there is in a pom.xml. All of the xml tags and attributes
are a standard enforced by the Maven tool, so that leaves the data in
between the xml - namely urls, people's names, project name/versions
and some small level of configuration (ie: numbers and file paths).
A different world than even a build.xml where basic building blocks
are used as a set of instructions.
Hen
14 messages in org.apache.legal-discussMaven repository issues [Was: Creativ...
