Closed Bug 754258 Opened 12 years ago Closed 12 years ago

MPL 2 upgrade: Rhino

Categories

(mozilla.org :: Licensing, task)

Product:
mozilla.org
Component:
Licensing
Type:
task
Priority:
Not set
Severity:
normal

Tracking

(Not tracked)

Status:
RESOLVED FIXED

People

(Reporter: gerv, Assigned: gerv)

References

Details

Attachments

(1 file)

Updated version of tests.tar.gz
1.70 MB, application/gzip
hannesw
: review+
Details 
This bug tracks the MPL 2 upgrade for the project named in the subject line.
The repo is here: 
https://github.com/mozilla/rhino

Gerv
Norris/Attila: any problems with me forking and submitting a pull request here?

Gerv
Hannes, what do you think?
Thanks Gerv, please go ahead with the fork/pull request!
Thanks, Gerv! After skimming over the changes and running the tests everything looks fine.

I notice that two files where left with the old license:

src/org/mozilla/javascript/v8dtoa/FastDtoaBuilder.java
src/org/mozilla/javascript/DToA.java

I assume these should be updated as well. Also, like André noted in the github pull request, there are two new files called status.txt and relic.log stemming from the conversion which probably should be removed.

Finally, we now have a copy of the Mozilla JS test suite bundled in testsrc/tests.tar.gz. This is the version from the CVS and still has the MPL 1.1/GPL 2.0/LGPL 2.1 license. Could that be an issue?
I merged the license update to git master. 

https://github.com/mozilla/rhino/commit/76eb030d7805faf57906766b80eb9271404a59a1

I also removed the two log files and updated the license in two other source files I spotted. The only issue I'm unsure about is the license of the bundled test file tarball. I don't think it's a problem since the test files are not part of the actual product code. Let me know if you think it is.
Status: NEW → RESOLVED
Closed: 12 years ago
Resolution: --- → FIXED
Hannes: I think we should fix the tests as well; it helps people to know what licence they are under, even if they are not part of the shipping product. Is there a particular reason they are checked in as a tarball rather than individual files? Is there any licensing information attached to the files at the moment?

Gerv
Gerv: These is the Mozilla JavaScript test suite as obtained from the old CVS repository. It's triple-licensed MPL 1.1/GPL 2.0/LGPL 2.1. We're using the old CVS version because newer versions aren't compatible with our test driver. The reason they're checked in as tarball is just to reduce size I guess (2mb versus 25mb).
Hannes: we should unzip it, relicense it and upload the new zip file. Can you point me at its location in the repo?

Gerv
They're in testsrc/tests.tar.gz. 

https://github.com/mozilla/rhino/blob/master/testsrc/tests.tar.gz

This was added recently, maybe after you made your fork so you may have to update your local copy.
Gerv, any idea you can get this done? A new Rhino release is long due and I'm not sure if we should wait for this or not.
Hi Hannes,

Here is a copy of the tar.gz file with the license headers changed. I am not in a position to test these tests by running them (tests can occasionally depend on e.g. line count in a file) so please can you do that and make sure they all still pass? Then you can check the file back in and ship Rhino.

Gerv
Attachment #632611 - Flags: review?(hannesw)
Indeed I get two failures based on line number changes, but they're easily fixed. Thanks a lot, Gerv!
Comment on attachment 632611 [details]
Updated version of tests.tar.gz

Committed new tests.tar.gz file to git master:

https://github.com/mozilla/rhino/commit/20c4530db6a4ec71c0f6ce947164bf9f2f83728a

For the record, these tests needed updates due to line numbers:

tests/js1_5/extensions/regress-50447.js
tests/js1_5/Regress/regress-167328.js
Attachment #632611 - Flags: review?(hannesw) → review+
You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.