Details

    • Type: Bug Bug
    • Status: Resolved
    • Priority: Major Major
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Component/s: Collections
    • Labels:
      None

      Description

      Each collection should (maybe even MUST, given the goal of this project) have a LICENSE.txt that contains the license and terms of use of the collection. This is required so that the users of ORP are aware of legal ramifications of using any given collection in their derivative work.

      Each collection should also have a README.txt that shortly describes the origin and content of the collection - in some cases the composition of a collection, or the way it was created, may change the significance of results based on this collection.

      I propose to add an ant rule that enforces the presence of these two files for each collection.

      1. ORP-3.patch
        7 kB
        Robert Muir

        Issue Links

          Activity

          Hide
          Robert Muir added a comment -

          Committed revision 895284.

          next we need to look at ORP-4 and doing some ant refactoring to enforce the presence of these files, and i think changing the output 'generation' directory from 'dist' would be good too, so its not misleading.

          Show
          Robert Muir added a comment - Committed revision 895284. next we need to look at ORP-4 and doing some ant refactoring to enforce the presence of these files, and i think changing the output 'generation' directory from 'dist' would be good too, so its not misleading.
          Hide
          Simon Willnauer added a comment -

          after someone has reviewed the text here, I will commit it.

          looks good robert, +1 from my side.

          simon

          Show
          Simon Willnauer added a comment - after someone has reviewed the text here, I will commit it. looks good robert, +1 from my side. simon
          Hide
          Robert Muir added a comment -

          i split out the ant refactoring work into a separate issue, so that we can take a first step and improve this documentation.

          after someone has reviewed the text here, I will commit it.

          Show
          Robert Muir added a comment - i split out the ant refactoring work into a separate issue, so that we can take a first step and improve this documentation. after someone has reviewed the text here, I will commit it.
          Hide
          Robert Muir added a comment -

          this patch adds some README and LICENSE information. I haven't tackled any ant stuff yet.

          If you have some time, please take a look and share your ideas.

          Show
          Robert Muir added a comment - this patch adds some README and LICENSE information. I haven't tackled any ant stuff yet. If you have some time, please take a look and share your ideas.
          Hide
          Robert Muir added a comment -

          Simon, maybe you want to resolve ORP-2, then I will construct README's and things here, and you can help with ant?

          The README's that Andrzej mentioned are not just important for licensing reasons, they would be extremely useful for users to understand what they are looking at.
          So I want to spend some good time on those.

          Show
          Robert Muir added a comment - Simon, maybe you want to resolve ORP-2 , then I will construct README's and things here, and you can help with ant? The README's that Andrzej mentioned are not just important for licensing reasons, they would be extremely useful for users to understand what they are looking at. So I want to spend some good time on those.
          Hide
          Simon Willnauer added a comment -

          See my commont on ORP-2. We should open an ant issue for everything we need to get done for ant. I'm happy to help with the ant stuff.

          simon

          Show
          Simon Willnauer added a comment - See my commont on ORP-2 . We should open an ant issue for everything we need to get done for ant. I'm happy to help with the ant stuff. simon
          Hide
          Robert Muir added a comment -

          Simon, do you want me to start working on this prior to ORP-2? If so, I can fix it too, and upload a new patch over there.

          Show
          Robert Muir added a comment - Simon, do you want me to start working on this prior to ORP-2 ? If so, I can fix it too, and upload a new patch over there.
          Hide
          Robert Muir added a comment -

          I would like to further mention some of my later thoughts, I am not a lawyer but I think by additionally doing these things I would feel better about things. Please comment/correct these ideas.

          • I think the ant target and build directory called 'dist' should be renamed to something else. we should not redistribute any data or imply we are doing this?
          • I think at the top level we should have a README/LICENSE that explains that the data being fetched is not under the Apache License, perhaps containing a LICENSE reference to each collection.
          • I think the resulting 'artifacts' that the build process produces should never be 'released' so to speak, only the mechanism for a user to download these. Perhaps when they run ant for a collection they might even need to hit Y/N to agree to the license, since it is not apache?
          • The above shouldnt be too much concern for automated builds, as we cant really do automated builds anyway, because regularly downloading huge hundreds-of-MB collections from these servers is something I think we should avoid.
          Show
          Robert Muir added a comment - I would like to further mention some of my later thoughts, I am not a lawyer but I think by additionally doing these things I would feel better about things. Please comment/correct these ideas. I think the ant target and build directory called 'dist' should be renamed to something else. we should not redistribute any data or imply we are doing this? I think at the top level we should have a README/LICENSE that explains that the data being fetched is not under the Apache License, perhaps containing a LICENSE reference to each collection. I think the resulting 'artifacts' that the build process produces should never be 'released' so to speak, only the mechanism for a user to download these. Perhaps when they run ant for a collection they might even need to hit Y/N to agree to the license, since it is not apache? The above shouldnt be too much concern for automated builds, as we cant really do automated builds anyway, because regularly downloading huge hundreds-of-MB collections from these servers is something I think we should avoid.

            People

            • Assignee:
              Robert Muir
              Reporter:
              Andrzej Bialecki
            • Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              0 Start watching this issue

              Dates

              • Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved:

                Development