Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Generated MSIs lack end-user license agreement #888

Closed
jmjaffe37 opened this issue Apr 29, 2024 · 10 comments · Fixed by #851
Closed

Generated MSIs lack end-user license agreement #888

jmjaffe37 opened this issue Apr 29, 2024 · 10 comments · Fixed by #851
Labels

Comments

@jmjaffe37
Copy link
Contributor

jmjaffe37 commented Apr 29, 2024

Not sure if this was a desired change, but we recently noticed that the generated MSIs (windows installers) will no-longer show the End-User License Agreement page (see example below of what the page looks like). I looked for a while, but I could not find the code change that lead to this

image

@karianna karianna added the bug label Apr 30, 2024
@gdams
Copy link
Member

gdams commented Apr 30, 2024

@jmjaffe37 I noticed this when testing, it looks like we need to add this back as part of the flow.

@gdams gdams linked a pull request Apr 30, 2024 that will close this issue
@jmjaffe37
Copy link
Contributor Author

jmjaffe37 commented Apr 30, 2024

Looks like this was implemented as a feature request in #162 (since agreeing to the GPL2 license is optional for software users)

@karianna
Copy link
Contributor

I guess we need to provide an override capability.

@jmjaffe37
Copy link
Contributor Author

I guess we need to provide an override capability.

The override capability was already implemented by @douph1. It depends on the JVM:

  • For Openj9, the license-OpenJ9.en-us.rtf license is shown
  • For hotspot, the license-GPLv2+CE.en-us.rtf is used (and skipped since it is optional)
  • Otherwise it says that there is no license defined for other custom JVMs

@jmjaffe37
Copy link
Contributor Author

jmjaffe37 commented Apr 30, 2024

I should be able to add in the capability for the user specify that they want to show the optional GPL license. Would that be preferable?

@karianna
Copy link
Contributor

I think we need to alter it so it's not vm based but "vm and vendor" based. I know that other non Adoptium vendors also have EULA's (on a hotspot base).

@jmjaffe37
Copy link
Contributor Author

I think we need to alter it so it's not vm based but "vm and vendor" based. I know that other non Adoptium vendors also have EULA's (on a hotspot base).

Ok, that can be arranged

@jmjaffe37
Copy link
Contributor Author

I think we need to alter it so it's not vm based but "vm and vendor" based. I know that other non Adoptium vendors also have EULA's (on a hotspot base).

Feature added in #851. Also added sample code and an explanation of how to implement custom end-user license behavior in the readme

@jmjaffe37
Copy link
Contributor Author

The vendor_based license logic has been removed (as was decided recently), but the README now has documentation on license behavior. If similar logic is desired in the future, it will be quick and easy to implement

@karianna
Copy link
Contributor

karianna commented May 1, 2024

Thank you!

@gdams gdams closed this as completed in #851 May 9, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants