Skip to content
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

--list-config license enhancement #265

Closed
jmcc0nn3ll opened this issue Feb 16, 2016 · 11 comments · Fixed by #11993
Closed

--list-config license enhancement #265

jmcc0nn3ll opened this issue Feb 16, 2016 · 11 comments · Fixed by #11993

Comments

@jmcc0nn3ll
Copy link
Contributor

migrated from Bugzilla #483677
status NEW severity enhancement in component start for 9.3.x
Reported in version 9.3.6 on platform PC
Assigned to: Joakim Erdfelt

On 2015-12-04 09:22:49 -0500, Jesse McConnell wrote:

would be a nice feature to be able to indicate the license for each jar listed in the --list-config command

@joakime joakime self-assigned this Feb 17, 2016
@joakime joakime removed their assignment Feb 17, 2016
@joakime
Copy link
Contributor

joakime commented Mar 13, 2018

@gregw this sounds like a good task for lachlan, wdyt?

@gregw
Copy link
Contributor

gregw commented Mar 13, 2018

@joakime I think the start code is probably a bit confusing as it's had so many maintainers... but we will see

@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Nov 20, 2019

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has been a full year without activit. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@stale stale bot added the Stale For auto-closed stale issues and pull requests label Nov 20, 2019
@joakime joakime removed the Stale For auto-closed stale issues and pull requests label Nov 20, 2019
@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Nov 25, 2020

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has been a full year without activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@stale stale bot added the Stale For auto-closed stale issues and pull requests label Nov 25, 2020
@gregw gregw removed the Stale For auto-closed stale issues and pull requests label Nov 25, 2020
@github-actions
Copy link

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has been a
full year without activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs.
Thank you for your contributions.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale For auto-closed stale issues and pull requests label May 25, 2022
@sbordet sbordet removed the Stale For auto-closed stale issues and pull requests label Jun 2, 2022
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Jun 3, 2023

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has been a
full year without activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs.
Thank you for your contributions.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale For auto-closed stale issues and pull requests label Jun 3, 2023
@joakime joakime removed the Stale For auto-closed stale issues and pull requests label Jun 3, 2023
strogiyotec added a commit to strogiyotec/jetty.project that referenced this issue Jun 25, 2023
strogiyotec added a commit to strogiyotec/jetty.project that referenced this issue Jun 25, 2023
@strogiyotec
Copy link
Contributor

@joakime @gregw @sbordet I made a PR
#9964
Could you take a look please

strogiyotec added a commit to strogiyotec/jetty.project that referenced this issue Jun 26, 2023
@sbordet
Copy link
Contributor

sbordet commented Jun 30, 2023

@strogiyotec thanks for the PR.
Looking at your implementation, you could use JarFile.getManifest().

However, I think it's opening a can of worms, as looking up Bundle-License from the manifest works only for OSGi...
@strogiyotec has designed for other means to lookup the license, but what if there are multiple licenses?
We risk presenting EPL 2, when can also be AL 2, etc.

I feel we won't be able to be precise, and at that point better to not present anything.

@joakime what do you think?

@gregw
Copy link
Contributor

gregw commented Jun 30, 2023

I feel we won't be able to be precise, and at that point better to not present anything.

We actually have an obligation to present our licenses correctly, as our attempt at doing so is the NOTICE.txt file. It would be nice if we could generate the contents of that through something like this, rather than have it be manually maintained.

For our own jars, there is no excuse for the manifest not to be accurate with regards to licenses. For our dependencies, we can raise issues to get them to correct any issues.

Ultimately you care about the the things you measure. If we don't report on the license listings in the manifest, then they will still be in-precise/wrong... we just wont notice it. Is that any better?

@sbordet
Copy link
Contributor

sbordet commented Jun 30, 2023

@gregw from the PR output I was surprised that slf4j-api.jar 2.0.5 does not have a license and indeed does not have neither Bundle-License nor a LICENSE.txt file.

Turns out in 2.0.7 there is META-INF/LICENSE.txt, but it is the MIT one, which would be incredibly difficult to recognize and parse. Fortunately it also has Bundle-License.

Perhaps we can just rely on Bundle-License and say unknown otherwise.
The idea being that we do the minimum work to figure it out, not the maximal effort.

Copy link

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has been a
full year without activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs.
Thank you for your contributions.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale For auto-closed stale issues and pull requests label Jun 30, 2024
@gregw gregw removed the Stale For auto-closed stale issues and pull requests label Jul 1, 2024
@gregw gregw self-assigned this Jul 1, 2024
gregw added a commit that referenced this issue Jul 1, 2024
List licenses in --list-classpath
@gregw gregw linked a pull request Jul 1, 2024 that will close this issue
@gregw gregw closed this as completed in 29d27f7 Jul 9, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

5 participants