Closed donraab closed 3 months ago
LGTM.
Please address #466
Thanks @waynebeaton ! I added a comment under the issue you requested to be addressed.
I'm curious to learn more. I saw the conversation where you explained that this project is dual licensed. Is the NOTICE.md file meant to reduce that confusion in the future? Does it follow some template?
The current copyright and licence headers already describe the project as dual licensed. By including this in the NOTICE file, it just makes that more explicit. Notice files tend to also list things like the licences of third party dependencies required by the binary (so that adopters can have easy access to this information), but -- other than JUnit -- I'm pretty sure that Eclipse Collections doesn't have any.
We do provide a template for NOTICE files in the handbook.
The inclusion of SPDX-License-Identifier: EPL-1.0 OR BSD-3 Clause
is the best disambiguator.
We do provide a template for NOTICE files in the handbook.
That's what I used. Thank you!
Is the NOTICE.md file meant to reduce that confusion in the future?
We do not currently have SPDX License Identifiers in any of our file headers (that I am aware of) so I wanted to have at least one file where we started doing that, assuming that bot scanners might be looking for this now.
LGTM.
Please address #466