GPL License... about jffi HOT 6 CLOSED

We don't run the test suite, so I suppose there's no issue with us removing that.

from jffi.

@sjerman Actually, I'm confused why it will affect IP. This is a test file for a separate library, not included in binary forms of jffi or the native ffi library. As long as the license is clearly stated, there shouldn't be any issue just having it in the repository.

I can remove the test suite (after confirming it does not ever need to run) but it seems unnecessary.

from jffi.

The issue is that IP scanners pick up the license from the Jar. If the test
suite wasn't in the binary jar, that would work equally well.

Thanks
Steve

On Tue, Mar 8, 2016 at 8:05 AM Charles Oliver Nutter <
[email protected]> wrote:

@sjerman https://github.com/sjerman Actually, I'm confused why it will
affect IP. This is a test file for a separate library, not included in
binary forms of jffi or the native ffi library. As long as the license is
clearly stated, there shouldn't be any issue just having it in the
repository.

I can remove the test suite (after confirming it does not ever need to
run) but it seems unnecessary.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#19 (comment).

from jffi.

If the test suite is getting included in the jar, that's definitely a bug.

from jffi.

It was a while since i looked at this... I think maybe it was being included in the source jar rather than the binary

from jffi.

Licenses for the project and contained files are clearly delimited, so I think this is a non-issue. If it becomes an issue for someone in the future, we can look at having these GPL sources fetched only for build or test.

from jffi.