geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Dillon <ja...@planet57.com>
Subject Re: Geronimo build automation status (longish)
Date Tue, 05 Dec 2006 06:41:04 GMT
At this point I think the AH usage is unofficial... something I have  
been trying to get working.  Once I get it to run our testsuite,  
build all our projects and dependent components and run the tck  
tests... once I get there, then I will officially recommend to the  
PMC that we endorse and use AH as the official automated build too  
for Geronimo.

But right now I'm still working out the details, testing how well it  
will work.

I can mail the license text to the PMC in the mean-time for review if  
that is what you would like.

--jason


On Dec 4, 2006, at 9:04 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:

>
> On Dec 4, 2006, at 10:03 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
>
>>
>> As I mentioned in the initial email, the AntHill license is very  
>> similar to that of JIRA or Confluence... they grant licenses for  
>> use by open-source projects.
>>
>> I had hopped to get a more perfect and complete system before I  
>> brought this to the community... though I'm not sure that would  
>> have mattered much.  Probably more that the tool is not open- 
>> source is why you even mention this.  If I did something similar  
>> with CC or Continuum no one would even mention it.  Too bad  
>> neither of those tools is comprehensive enough to do the job  
>> though... but maybe if we wait for a few more years they will be  
>> closer.
>
> No, I wasn't really concerned about the tool not being open-source.  
> More concerned about what the license is... I saw "Licensed TO  
> Apache Geronimo TO BUILD OPEN-SOURCE PROJECTS ONLY". I'd like to be  
> sure the license terms (restrictions, etc) are communicated with  
> the group. So, we can understand the terms and ensure we follow  
> them -- you never know when the big one will hit the Bay Area... :-P
>
> --kevan


Mime
View raw message