Open GoogleCodeExporter opened 9 years ago
Yes please -- the findbugs jsr305 is LGPL and it would be better to have a BSD
version.
Original comment by lind...@inuus.com
on 8 Oct 2010 at 5:14
Yes, that would be great. That project is of great use at the moment.
Especially since Intellij Idea will support the annotations of JSR305 in the
next version:
http://youtrack.jetbrains.net/issue/IDEA-64677
Original comment by js.cedar...@gmail.com
on 31 Jan 2011 at 8:46
The Findbugs project has Maven artifacts for JSR-305:
http://repo2.maven.org/maven2/com/google/code/findbugs/jsr305/1.3.9/
Original comment by chdheu@gmail.com
on 11 Apr 2011 at 9:30
findbugs is lgpl and can't be included without pain in apache 2.0 runtime...
Original comment by plindner@google.com
on 11 Apr 2011 at 11:53
@plindner: the com.google.code.findbugs:jsr305 artifact is licensed under
Apache 2.0:
http://repo2.maven.org/maven2/com/google/code/findbugs/jsr305/1.3.9/jsr305-1.3.9
.pom
Original comment by t.broyer
on 27 Apr 2011 at 8:26
ugh, what a mess.
The license for findbugs itself is LGPL
http://code.google.com/p/findbugs/source/browse/trunk/findbugs/licenses/LICENSE.txt
However findbugs pulls in jsr305 code which is new BSD
http://code.google.com/p/findbugs/source/browse/trunk/findbugs/licenses/LICENSE-jsr305.txt
I'm not sure why the pom file specifies Apache 2.0 -- Is it coming from the
findbugs maven plugin, which is Apache 2.0 licensed?
http://maven-plugins.cvs.sourceforge.net/maven-plugins/maven-plugins/findbugs/
Original comment by plindner@google.com
on 27 Apr 2011 at 9:18
Any progress? Would like to see that issue resolved.
Original comment by js.cedar...@gmail.com
on 25 Aug 2011 at 2:17
FWIW, It would be good that this codebase gets its own license notice and
copyright too. except a reference to the BSD, there is no copyright, nor notice
here except in findbugs:
http://code.google.com/p/findbugs/source/browse/trunk/findbugs/licenses/LICENSE-
jsr305.txt
And there the pointer is to a license template:
http://www.opensource.org/licenses/bsd-license.php not a real license ....
Original comment by pombreda...@gmail.com
on 21 Feb 2012 at 4:07
Perhaps, if all parties agree, the attached file could be checked into the root
tree as LICENSE.txt? William Pugh was just a best guess as to the copyright
holder, as he's the dev listed here and on jcp.org's page:
http://jcp.org/en/jsr/detail?id=305#3
Thoughts?
Original comment by tclem...@gmail.com
on 30 Mar 2012 at 7:45
Attachments:
You either need to include the LICENSE file, or remove the .java source file in
the jsr305-x.x.x.jar file and only distribute it as a binary file. Currently
the jar-file contains both source file (without correct license notice) AND
binary class-files. This violates the BSD license as I understand it.
Please correct me if I'm wrong.
Original comment by knu...@gmail.com
on 2 Jan 2013 at 12:49
And see also https://github.com/stephenc/findbugs-annotations which is a
clean-room implementation of the annotations declared in FindBugs.
Original comment by jgl...@cloudbees.com
on 18 Feb 2014 at 2:21
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
david...@gmail.com
on 17 Jun 2009 at 3:00