Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 80897 invoked from network); 21 Sep 2009 19:28:48 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 21 Sep 2009 19:28:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 90515 invoked by uid 500); 21 Sep 2009 19:28:47 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 90438 invoked by uid 500); 21 Sep 2009 19:28:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@couchdb.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 90428 invoked by uid 99); 21 Sep 2009 19:28:47 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 21 Sep 2009 19:28:47 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [80.68.94.123] (HELO tumbolia.org) (80.68.94.123) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 21 Sep 2009 19:28:38 +0000 Received: from nslater by tumbolia.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1MpoYa-0001Sj-V3 for dev@couchdb.apache.org; Mon, 21 Sep 2009 20:28:16 +0100 Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2009 20:28:16 +0100 From: Noah Slater To: dev@couchdb.apache.org Subject: Re: Second call for objections releasing 0.10 Message-ID: <20090921192816.GA5603@tumbolia.org> Mail-Followup-To: dev@couchdb.apache.org References: <20090920130655.GG29736@tumbolia.org> <24C63657-07C4-4F7D-88FF-1F206BB5DCED@apache.org> <20090921141518.GE4098@tumbolia.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-Noah: Awesome User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Mon, Sep 21, 2009 at 10:57:03AM -0400, Paul Davis wrote: > I updated all of the config files for the etap tests to include an ASF > license header. As per [1] it looks like we should do the same for > default.ini.tpl.in and local.ini. No, as previously discussed, I do not want to do this. Thanks, -- Noah Slater, http://tumbolia.org/nslater