New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Include a proper license header in source files #1248
Comments
Should I use ASL 2.0 and MIT as the license tag for the RPM package hosted and redistributed by Fedora? |
On current master (and for 0.14), I fixed a lot of these problems via c1938fe. |
Great, glad to hear, I will check how the licensecheck is with 0.14 or master |
When is 0.14 scheduled for release? |
Soon. It's currently in the stabilization phase. If no one reports any serious regressions, I'll release within a week or two. |
Here is the results with 0.14, not sure how missing copyright is handled in Fedora. Who have the copyright on these files?
|
I went through the entire "no copyright" section and added a generic copyright line. Note we want to get away from having to update authors and years in the license header. Ideally authors would be determined from git history if necessary. See PR #1249 The "unknown or generated" section is a bit confusing. Some files listed are not generated but they do contain a license header (e.g. bitcoinj-release-0.14/core/src/test/java/org/bitcoinj/core/BloomFilterTest.java). I do not plan to do anything about the orchid modules licenses/copyrights. Their license is stated in bitcoinj-release-0.14/orchid/LICENSE and I guess that is valid for the whole module. |
Thanks
That is strange, I will investigate those
That should be fine, since we do not ship Orchid. |
@schildbach Can we close this one? |
I guess yes. @hegjon If there is some license problem left, please comment and I'll re-open this issue. |
It would make it easier to redistribute bitcoinj in Fedora if each source file contains a license header.
The pom.xml and COPYING states that the project is ASL 2.0, but there is code with non ASL 2.0 licenses.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: