commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Niall Pemberton" <niall.pember...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release commons-sandbox-parent 3
Date Tue, 08 Jan 2008 11:26:19 GMT
On Jan 8, 2008 10:24 AM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 08/01/2008, Niall Pemberton <niall.pemberton@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Jan 8, 2008 12:24 AM, Niall Pemberton <niall.pemberton@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Jan 8, 2008 12:17 AM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > I thought there were some licensing issues related to using Cobertura?
> > > >
> > > > e.g.
> > > >
> > > > http://www.nabble.com/Re%3A--all--Commons-SCXML-0.7-RC1-available-p14278429.html
> > >
> > > Only on distrubuting in releases - fine to use on the web site.
> >
> > For any components wanting to use it and distribute the docs/site in
> > the distro - then we can just simply exclude the three GPL licensed
> > javascript files - I've tried this out with Commons IO and the report
> > seems to work fine without them:
> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=rev&revision=609834
> > Niall
> >
>
> I just saw that.
>
> How can one ensure that the JS files are excluded from distributions?

Thats what the change I made to the assembly descriptor is doing.

> Is it possible to add exclusions via the parent POM?
>
> At the very least it seems to me that the parent POM needs to document
> which files must be excluded, and how to exclude them.
>
> Perhaps RAT will (or can be updated to) report on violations?

You can run rat on the (unpacked) binary distro, but it does flag up a
alot of files since generated filles (e.g. javadocs) don't include
source headers.

> Alternatively, the parent POM could delete the JS files after running
> the report, so that there is no possibility of them being included in
> distributions.

Yes I guess this could be done with the antrun plugin.

Niall

> > > Niall
> > >
> > >
> > > > On 07/01/2008, Dennis Lundberg <dennisl@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > I'd like to update the version for the cobertura-maven-plugin before
we
> > > > > release this. The version currently being used is broken. Is that
OK?
> > > > >
> > > > > Niall Pemberton wrote:
> > > > > > Hi,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I'd like to release commons-sandbox-parent pom version 3 - then
last
> > > > > > release used commons-parent version 4 and the only real change
is to
> > > > > > upgrade to the latest version 6 of commons-parent.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > A full diff of the pom.xml can be found at this address:
> > > > > > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/commons/proper/commons-sandbox-parent/trunk/pom.xml?r1=609497&r2=564663&diff_format=h
> > > > > >
> > > > > > There are no changes to the site.xml.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The version number in the pom will be updated automatically
during the
> > > > > > release process.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [ ] +1
> > > > > > [ ] =0
> > > > > > [ ] -1
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Vote is open for 72 hours
> > > > > >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org


Mime
View raw message