Licensing Situation

[javahippie]

Hi,

I'm wondering about the license of the modules in this repository. The LICENSE file in the project root seems to be related to a BSD License, although it is not explicitly called that.

Some files in the repository are additonally licensed under Apache 2.0 license via source headers, e.g. hyperjaxb/ejb/schemas/customizations/src/main/resources/config/maven-checks.xml or hyperjaxb/src/main/resources/config/maven-checks.xml

[rdmueller]

aren't both licences quite open and free? I'm sure it would have been in Alexey's interest for everyone to be able to use this software however they wanted.

[mattrpav]

@javahippie are you requesting all licenses used to be listed in the LICENSE file?

[javahippie]

@rdmueller Yes, both licenses are pretty permissable :)

@mattrpav Thanks for the question, I realized I should have put more time into writing this issue, let me try again:

The LICENSE Text in the repository does not seem to adhere to (or explicitly mention) a standard license, although it seems to be a part of the FreeBSD license.

In the Maven central repo the license is listed as "BSD-Style License", and when using license scanning tools like trivy on a Java project, the license is mentioned as "Non Standard", which would be flagged by most licensing tools. While checking for source headers I saw these files mentioned under Apache License 2.0, which is not noted in the packaged artefacts and cannot be caught by license scanners.

As both licenses are pretty open, as @rdmueller already mentioned, this should not be a big issue, but if we wanted to include an SBOM or a similar list of dependencies with versions, we might not necessarily tell the whole truth, if I interpret the handling of OSS licenses correctly

[mattrpav]

@javahippie that makes sense. This code base has been heavily modified and refactored since the new maintainers have taken over. I believe it is reasonable that we now have forked work and level-setting the license across the repo would be a good housekeeping item. I've kicked up a conversation with the maintainers and we'll make a task to level licensing notice and headers across the code base.

dev task: #575