httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "William A. Rowe, Jr." <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] 2.0.57 candidate
Date Fri, 21 Apr 2006 17:39:12 GMT
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On 4/19/06, Colm MacCarthaigh <> wrote:
>>Candidate tarballs for 2.0.57 are now available for testing/voting at;
>>This doesn't include a changed notice-of-license text though, which is a
>>potential open issue.
> I'm -1 due to the copyright notice changes.  A bunch of files
> magically added years to copyright notices (i.e. from -2004 to -2006)
> when those files didn't actually substantively change during that
> period.  That's a no-no.

How is this a showstopper?  As has been pointed out, your comments are late
to the table, and this certainly isn't a change in existing practice, and
most certainly doesn't invalidate the (initial and appropriate) copyrights.

-1 to adopting Jackrabbits' license until Roy's (very reasonable) nit on the
language is addressed.  -1 to removing copyright until we have an absolute,
documented policy from ASF legal.  I'm glad you and Roy feel entirely assured
that you speak for legal/privy to its workings and, of course, its final
conclusions.  For the sanity of all the rest of us project members, let us
please work from documented policy though, can we?  And feh - let's just
have done with this tarball release and revisit once policy is *set*.

I don't concur with Colm, the tarball is the release and changing the legal
text is more significant, perhaps, than even the code itself.  So it's yet
another bump that strikes me as silly.


View raw message