[DAFFODIL-1906] Updates to LICENSE/NOTICE files

• Type: Bug
• Status: Closed
• Priority: Blocker
• Resolution: Fixed
• Fix Version/s: 2.1.0
• Component/s: Infrastructure
• Assignee: Dave Thompson
• Reporter: Steve Lawrence
• Created: 20/Feb/18 12:36
• Updated: 09/Apr/18 14:33
• Resolved: 05/Apr/18 14:38

Description

The following updates should be made to the LICENSE/NOTICE files:

1. In the source LICENSE file, for all bundled dependencies we should be more explicit about exactly which files/directories are under a non-Apache license. For example saying "we bundle sources from Passera" is not enough. Instead, we should list out the directory paths to the passera files/directories. Also, be more explicit about the license. For example:
    
     daffodil-lib/src/main/scala/passera/
     daffodil-lib/src/test/scala/passera/
   BSD-3-Clause:
    
     (then the license text).
2. Rename the LICENSE/NOTICE in daffodil-cli something different to clarify that they are not the license for that directory, but are for the binary releases. Something like "LICENSE-bin" would be acceptable.
3. In the NOTICE, we should list the original authors of all source transferred to ASF (i.e. NCSA, Tresys, and IBM).
4. Determine if we can split partially licensed files. For example, in daffodil-test/src/test/resources/org/apache/daffodil/ibm-tests/, we have multiple files that were originally created by IBM (transferred to ASF via an SGA), but which include DFDL snippets taken from the Open Grid Forum DFDL Spec, which is under a non-Apache license. If possible and if without too much messiness, we should move the snippets out to separate files so that there are no files that are half-Apache/half OGF licensed.
5. Revert the LICENSE and NOTICE changes in PR-43 (https://github.com/apache/incubator-daffodil/pull/43) so that the NOTICE file does not contain information about BSD and other licenses (i.e. the copyright information should be moved back to the LICENSE file)