Bugzilla – Full Text Bug Listing
| Summary: | CBI website should include eplv2 license for projects that use it for license-feature | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | [Technology] CBI | Reporter: | Jeff Johnston <jjohnstn> |
| Component: | license | Assignee: | Mikaël Barbero <mikael.barbero> |
| Status: | CLOSED FIXED | QA Contact: | |
| Severity: | normal | ||
| Priority: | P3 | CC: | akurtakov, mandrikov, mikael.barbero, mike.milinkovich, wayne.beaton |
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | PC | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| See Also: |
https://git.eclipse.org/r/111366 https://git.eclipse.org/c/cbi/org.eclipse.license.git/commit/?id=683469b7d5c228f3959a5ffe92c3df9bb89c140c https://git.eclipse.org/r/116294 https://git.eclipse.org/r/116295 https://git.eclipse.org/c/cbi/org.eclipse.license.git/commit/?id=664333633f945beec61c02c4e6a25225f662f6bf https://git.eclipse.org/c/www.eclipse.org/legal.git/commit/?id=ccfb7b868b36deaf1973adba9c212a232ae2a4fe |
||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Bug Depends on: | 525401 | ||
| Bug Blocks: | 519789 | ||
|
Description
Jeff Johnston
@Wayne - Jeff assigned this to license@, which isn't correct. I will leave it to you to assign this to the right EMO person. Thanks. Question: should the license we put here be the HTML version or the text version? It seems with EPL-1.0, we generally pushed out the HTML version. However, most other licenses use text. Thoughts? I believe that this is a CBI issue. Mikael, can this be prioritized? I am afraid that if delayed further there won't be many project on the release train going to move to EPL2. Ok, will try to get a patch tonight. Ok, we need to decide what to publish. Currently EPL v1 is published via feature org.eclipse.license. This feature is available in two versions: 1.0.0.v20131003-1638 and 1.0.1.v20140414-1359 (the latter containing layout fixes in the TXT version). Do we want to release the same feature in version 2.0.x for EPL v2 or feature with another, e.g., org.eclipse.license_v2 in version 1.0.0. WDYT? (In reply to Mikaël Barbero from comment #6) > Ok, we need to decide what to publish. Currently EPL v1 is published via > feature org.eclipse.license. This feature is available in two versions: > 1.0.0.v20131003-1638 and 1.0.1.v20140414-1359 (the latter containing layout > fixes in the TXT version). Do we want to release the same feature in version > 2.0.x for EPL v2 or feature with another, e.g., org.eclipse.license_v2 in > version 1.0.0. WDYT? version 2.0.0 sounds as the right thing to me. I can't find any official SUA for EPL v2, so I did as said in the EPLv2 FAQ: I replaced all references to EPLv1 to EPLv2 (and links to plain HTML license). However, I think it would be good to have such a SUA readily available to the community (like https://www.eclipse.org/legal/epl/notice.php). We may take the opportunity to update references to other license agreements. Path is coming... New Gerrit change created: https://git.eclipse.org/r/111366 (In reply to Mikaël Barbero from comment #8) > I can't find any official SUA for EPL v2, so I did as said in the EPLv2 FAQ: > I replaced all references to EPLv1 to EPLv2 (and links to plain HTML > license). However, I think it would be good to have such a SUA readily > available to the community (like > https://www.eclipse.org/legal/epl/notice.php). We may take the opportunity > to update references to other license agreements. > > Path is coming... Please do not push any revisions to any legal documents without first working with Wayne to ensure that any revisions are run through the proper legal, management, and Board-level reviews. Also, at the risk of stating the obvious, if we want to push a text version (or any other format for that matter), please do not create one yourself. Use the ones linked off of http://www.eclipse.org/legal/epl-2.0/ If we are missing a format, please contact license@eclipse.org and let us know there what you need. We need to get the lawyers to review each format version right down to the formatting. E.g. text version at http://www.eclipse.org/org/documents/epl-2.0/EPL-2.0.txt Thanks. (In reply to Mike Milinkovich from comment #10) > Please do not push any revisions to any legal documents without first > working with Wayne to ensure that any revisions are run through the proper > legal, management, and Board-level reviews. Thanks for the heads up. I only pushed a review for now and will wait for Wayne's +2 before submitting. Wayne? (In reply to Mikaël Barbero from comment #12) > Wayne? The challenge is that it's not quite as easy as just changing out EPL-1.0 for EPL-2.0 in the SUA. I've be investigating doing away with the SUA, but this is just another example of where it might be handy. See Bug 525401. Ok, thanks.
It means that projects can't really switch to EPL v2 yet, right? ('can't' meaning 'they are not sure that it will be a one time update; if they update their legal docs now, they may have to update them again later once bug 525401 is solved.')
I've updated https://git.eclipse.org/r/111366 to reflect changes made in bug 525401. I think we're good to go. Wayne, could you review? Gerrit change https://git.eclipse.org/r/111366 was merged to [master]. Commit: http://git.eclipse.org/c/cbi/org.eclipse.license.git/commit/?id=683469b7d5c228f3959a5ffe92c3df9bb89c140c I've published a snapshot build of the license feature. The p2 repo is available at http://download.eclipse.org/cbi/updates/license/2.0.0-SNAPSHOT Jeff, Alexander, Could you give it a try? Thanks. (In reply to Mikaël Barbero from comment #17) > I've published a snapshot build of the license feature. The p2 repo is > available at http://download.eclipse.org/cbi/updates/license/2.0.0-SNAPSHOT > > Jeff, Alexander, > > Could you give it a try? Thanks. Mikaël, hope you don't mind test by another person :) Did a test for EclEmma and noticed that following line is diplayed at the end of license text during installation: ########### end of license property ########################################## which previously was a comment in feature.properties and backslash was added before it. Everything else looks good to me. Looking forward to be able to use this after fix and release. Thanks. (In reply to Evgeny Mandrikov from comment #18) > Did a test for EclEmma and noticed that following line is diplayed at the > end of license text during installation: If EclEmma is upgrading to the EPL-2.0, can you please send a brief note to emo@eclipse.org asking that the project's license information be updated in the database? (In reply to Wayne Beaton from comment #19) > (In reply to Evgeny Mandrikov from comment #18) > > Did a test for EclEmma and noticed that following line is diplayed at the > > end of license text during installation: > > If EclEmma is upgrading to the EPL-2.0, can you please send a brief note to > emo@eclipse.org asking that the project's license information be updated in > the database? Currently preparing TODOs, so thank you for this note - will do notify during actual upgrade. (In reply to Evgeny Mandrikov from comment #18) > (In reply to Mikaël Barbero from comment #17) > > I've published a snapshot build of the license feature. The p2 repo is > > available at http://download.eclipse.org/cbi/updates/license/2.0.0-SNAPSHOT > > > > Jeff, Alexander, > > > > Could you give it a try? Thanks. > > Mikaël, hope you don't mind test by another person :) Thank. Was asking to Jeff and Alex as they already commented on this bug :) > Did a test for EclEmma and noticed that following line is diplayed at the > end of license text during installation: > > ########### end of license property > ########################################## > > which previously was a comment in feature.properties and backslash was added > before it. I've copy/pasted the content of https://www.eclipse.org/legal/epl/feature.properties.txt and you're right, it seems that the last \ is too much. Wayne, I will push a patch shortly for this on legal.git and will also update https://git.eclipse.org/r/#/c/111366/ > Everything else looks good to me. Looking forward to be able to use this > after fix and release. Thanks. Thanks for the testing. New Gerrit change created: https://git.eclipse.org/r/116294 From Linux Tools POV while we still look for this move it's currently not our highest prio. New Gerrit change created: https://git.eclipse.org/r/116295 Gerrit change https://git.eclipse.org/r/116295 was merged to [master]. Commit: http://git.eclipse.org/c/cbi/org.eclipse.license.git/commit/?id=664333633f945beec61c02c4e6a25225f662f6bf (In reply to Eclipse Genie from comment #25) > Gerrit change https://git.eclipse.org/r/116295 was merged to [master]. > Commit: > http://git.eclipse.org/c/cbi/org.eclipse.license.git/commit/ > ?id=664333633f945beec61c02c4e6a25225f662f6bf I've published a new SNAPSHOT (http://download.eclipse.org/cbi/updates/license/2.0.0-SNAPSHOT) with the change above. Evgeny, Does it fix your issue? (In reply to Mikaël Barbero from comment #26) > I've published a new SNAPSHOT > (http://download.eclipse.org/cbi/updates/license/2.0.0-SNAPSHOT) with the > change above. > > Evgeny, > > Does it fix your issue? Yes. Thanks. (In reply to Evgeny Mandrikov from comment #27) > (In reply to Mikaël Barbero from comment #26) > > I've published a new SNAPSHOT > > (http://download.eclipse.org/cbi/updates/license/2.0.0-SNAPSHOT) with the > > change above. > > > > Evgeny, > > > > Does it fix your issue? > > Yes. Thanks. Thanks Evgeny. Wayne, I'll wait for your go to promote this snapshot as a 2.0.0 release. (In reply to Mikaël Barbero from comment #28) > I'll wait for your go to promote this snapshot as a 2.0.0 release. Are you suggesting a release review? Is it time for a 2.0 release/graduation? (In reply to Wayne Beaton from comment #29) > (In reply to Mikaël Barbero from comment #28) > > I'll wait for your go to promote this snapshot as a 2.0.0 release. > > Are you suggesting a release review? Is it time for a 2.0 release/graduation? Yes, we need to do that. I'll open a different bug to track this effort. In the meantime, do you +1 the current snapshot as a proper milestone release? Thanks. (In reply to Mikaël Barbero from comment #30) > In the meantime, do you +1 the current snapshot as a proper milestone > release? Thanks. I'm not a project committer and so don't get a vote. But if it helps, +1 Gerrit change https://git.eclipse.org/r/116294 was merged to [master]. Commit: http://git.eclipse.org/c/www.eclipse.org/legal.git/commit/?id=ccfb7b868b36deaf1973adba9c212a232ae2a4fe A license feature for EPL v2.0 is now available from the following p2 repositories http://download.eclipse.org/cbi/updates/license/ (aggregated one with 1.0.0 and 1.0.1 as well) and directly from http://download.eclipse.org/cbi/updates/license/2.0.0.v20180130-0820 |