flex-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Release Apache FlexJS 0.7.0 RC1
Date Tue, 06 Sep 2016 14:41:48 GMT

-1 (binding). The LICENSE file mentions 2 MIT licensed pieces of software but we are not including
the copyright or text of the respective MIT license as required by terms of the MIT license.
[1] Normally in a source release you would add a local file pointer to the full text in LICENSE
[2]. I would vote +1 on another RC if there pointer to the full MIT license text added.

For info on ASF policy and why I voted -1 see [3] ("meet all requirements of ASF policy”)
[4] (“Every ASF release MUST comply with ASF licensing policy") and [5] ("The component
license itself MUST either be appended or else stored elsewhere in the package”).

But again just a reminder that a -1 is not a veto, a release only needs 3 +1 and more +1s
than -1s to be made a release. People can keep voting and people can change their votes at
any time, including those who have previously voted +1 on this.

I checked:
- signatures and hashed good
- all source files have ASF headers
- no unexpected binary files in source release
- unable to compile from source (with some issues)
- tests pass

I took a quick look at the connivance binary release and found no obvious issues, it does
however suffer from the same licensing issue mentioned above.


1. https://opensource.org/licenses/MIT
2. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps
3. http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#release-approval
4. http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#licensing
5. http://www.apache.org/legal/release-policy.html#license-file
View raw message