Robert Muir commented on ORP-3:
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.
Collections need LICENSE and README
Project: Open Relevance Project
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Andrzej Bialecki
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.
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.