Portals Bridges
  1. Portals Bridges
  2. PB-110

Review bridges-script before initial release

    Details

    • Type: Task Task
    • Status: Resolved
    • Priority: Major Major
    • Resolution: Fixed
    • Affects Version/s: None
    • Fix Version/s: bridges-script-2.0
    • Component/s: None
    • Labels:
      None

      Activity

      Hide
      Woonsan Ko added a comment -
      • Verified with rat plugin (`mvn rat:rat' or `mvn -P rat install')
      • Verified with ianal plugin (`mvn ianal:verify-legal-files')
      Show
      Woonsan Ko added a comment - Verified with rat plugin (`mvn rat:rat' or `mvn -P rat install') Verified with ianal plugin (`mvn ianal:verify-legal-files')
      Hide
      Woonsan Ko added a comment -

      Here are newly introduced library dependencies with bridges-script:

      (1) javax.script:script-api:jar:1.0
      (2) com.sun.script:groovy-engine:jar:20080611
      (3) com.sun.script:js-engine:jar:20080611
      (4) com.sun.script:jython-engine:jar:20080611
      (5) com.sun.script:jruby-engine:jar:20080611
      (6) com.sun.script:bsh-engine:jar:20080611
      (7) org.codehaus.groovy:groovy-all:jar:1.8.2
      (8) rhino:js:jar:1.7R2
      (9) org.python:jython:jar:2.2.1
      (10) org.jruby:jruby:jar:1.6.4
      (11) org.beanshell:bsh:jar:2.0b4


      (1), (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6) is from the following ServiceMix maven repository which is defined in the root pom.xml:

      <!-- required for scripting engine jars -->
      <repository>
      <id>servicemix</id>
      <name>ServiceMix Repository</name>
      <url>http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/m2-repo</url>
      </repository>

      The ServiceMix team seems to have built the JSR-223 API and the reference implementations by themselves and decided to put those into their repository for their scripting integrations.
      I assume this should be okay in an Apache project and also okay to use their repository and dependencies from the repo in our project.

      For (7), Groovy is licensed by Apache License 2.0.
      For (8), Rhino can be licensed by MPL 1.1. Since we just provide a binary dependency for users' convenience and testing, we can just add a notice for this. [1]
      For (9), Jython license seems to be similar to Apache License but quite not sure... [2]
      For (10), Jruby can be licensed by CPL which is in the same category as MPL. [1]
      For (11), Beanshell is licensed by SPL which is in the same category as MPL. [1]

      Anyway, I think it seems good enough to add each license file and notes into the NOTICE file for those.

      [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
      [2] http://www.jython.org/license.html

      Show
      Woonsan Ko added a comment - Here are newly introduced library dependencies with bridges-script: (1) javax.script:script-api:jar:1.0 (2) com.sun.script:groovy-engine:jar:20080611 (3) com.sun.script:js-engine:jar:20080611 (4) com.sun.script:jython-engine:jar:20080611 (5) com.sun.script:jruby-engine:jar:20080611 (6) com.sun.script:bsh-engine:jar:20080611 (7) org.codehaus.groovy:groovy-all:jar:1.8.2 (8) rhino:js:jar:1.7R2 (9) org.python:jython:jar:2.2.1 (10) org.jruby:jruby:jar:1.6.4 (11) org.beanshell:bsh:jar:2.0b4 (1), (2), (3), (4), (5) and (6) is from the following ServiceMix maven repository which is defined in the root pom.xml: <!-- required for scripting engine jars --> <repository> <id>servicemix</id> <name>ServiceMix Repository</name> <url> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/servicemix/m2-repo </url> </repository> The ServiceMix team seems to have built the JSR-223 API and the reference implementations by themselves and decided to put those into their repository for their scripting integrations. I assume this should be okay in an Apache project and also okay to use their repository and dependencies from the repo in our project. For (7), Groovy is licensed by Apache License 2.0. For (8), Rhino can be licensed by MPL 1.1. Since we just provide a binary dependency for users' convenience and testing, we can just add a notice for this. [1] For (9), Jython license seems to be similar to Apache License but quite not sure... [2] For (10), Jruby can be licensed by CPL which is in the same category as MPL. [1] For (11), Beanshell is licensed by SPL which is in the same category as MPL. [1] Anyway, I think it seems good enough to add each license file and notes into the NOTICE file for those. [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html [2] http://www.jython.org/license.html
      Hide
      Woonsan Ko added a comment -

      Added third party license files and comments in the notice file.

      Show
      Woonsan Ko added a comment - Added third party license files and comments in the notice file.

        People

        • Assignee:
          Woonsan Ko
          Reporter:
          Woonsan Ko
        • Votes:
          0 Vote for this issue
          Watchers:
          0 Start watching this issue

          Dates

          • Created:
            Updated:
            Resolved:

            Development