This vote has been open for a little while now.
What should we do about it?
Hi David,On Tue, Apr 1, 2008 at 7:07 PM, David Jencks <email@example.com> wrote:
As (in my experience) most process bits of ASF stuff any docs you may find are generally wrong and if you ask any collection of old-timers you get a different answer from each. However there's been a lot of discussion on legal-discuss recently and after a lot of prodding there seems to be consensus that:- all distribution units need LICENSE and NOTICE files- expected svn checkout units form a "distribution" so need to include LICENSE and NOTICE files- all other LICENSE and NOTICE files can be generated or from svn- each LICENSE and NOTICE file refers only to the contents of the distribution unit, not anything such as required dependencies that might be needed to use it.
We comply with all these rules except for the inclusion of the LICENSE and NOTICE files at the SVN checkout root.
I'm going to add them.
.../trunk and ..../branches/1.1.0 since those are what we expect people to check out if they want to build it themselves.
Ok, I'm going to add them in both locations.
I haven't had time to look at this branch. Is it built with maven? I'm not sure if I'll have time to look soon. If you guys are confident that all the artifacts have appropriate legal files and there are no snapshots in any maven build (if used) I'm happy to change to +0.
Yeah, It is built with Maven. Here are the instructions to build Studio: http://directory.apache.org/studio/building.html