Mailing-List: contact dev-help@abdera.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@abdera.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of david.calavera@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.219.217 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to
         :cc:content-type;
        b=DtOTzL+I5/lkAIV6pGCEcZh94rsdACRjxzhf48tLnOrR08ChvU5OUnlgYXYIreCQoq
         ce5JujfqzXcukbUdDW7/7D4Um6scXvnzplVqQpvGEADVnWqBsUzvv5cIH3QQ82Qx/hPu
         dvDvRK6I2i9QNEIfBCy0iWDTDPTQI7vXv4PPY=
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <5a75db780911051801s55f1af82x7f8bdc013133bf18@mail.gmail.com>
References: <71e1b5740910250253m515f8edem59aeda8166972163@mail.gmail.com>
	<baf7e05c0910250422h7df26999n3158c150dafbc731@mail.gmail.com>
	<71e1b5740910260137k759302fdid805db9e784c384f@mail.gmail.com>
	<5a75db780911051801s55f1af82x7f8bdc013133bf18@mail.gmail.com>
From: David Calavera <david.calavera@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 08:45:47 +0100
Message-ID: <baf7e05c0911052345j30d73b7dtcd22bd8d862e1d6f@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Publishing the 1.0 release artifacts
To: dev@abdera.apache.org
Cc: antelder@apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=00504502ca905fe9cf0477af09d6

--00504502ca905fe9cf0477af09d6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

I don't know who was the last committer that modified the trunk code, but
actually it doesn't compile even and I'm not sure if that code is too much
stable.

Luciano, seems you have much experience than us in legal stuff, any patch to
solve those issues is very appreciated.

Finally, I just want to remember that voting processes should go on 72
hours, messages after that can be gracefully ignored.

Cheers


On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 3:01 AM, Luciano Resende <luckbr1975@gmail.com>wrote:

> On Mon, Oct 26, 2009 at 12:37 AM, ant elder <antelder@apache.org> wrote:
> > Thanks for replying. I did find the old vote threads, the license
> > issue was a question on the copyrights in the NOTICE file, I've had a
> > look and I don't think there's any issue - not all copyrights need to
> > be included its only required third-party notices that are necessary,
> > and they seem ok. So it should be fine to publish those artifacts.
> > I'll wait for a while to see if anyone else comments.
> >
>
> I believe there were various enhancements applied to trunk after the
> release was started (see [1]). as this is a 1.0 release, would it be
> better to get these changes and start a new vote ?


> I also think that the legal files should be reviewed, there seems to
> be issues as described in [2], but there seems to be other issue as
> well (e.g jaxen-LICENSE.txt is a ASL 2.0 license, and the license.txt
> inside javen-1.1.1.jar is a BSD like one).
>
> [1] http://markmail.org/message/qnk6xo2e5eqtuyia
> [2] http://markmail.org/message/vb2s6gay4dfqxnbt


> --
> Luciano Resende
> http://people.apache.org/~lresende <http://people.apache.org/%7Elresende>
> http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>

--00504502ca905fe9cf0477af09d6--