Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 72904 invoked from network); 13 Mar 2007 13:11:52 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 13 Mar 2007 13:11:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 95985 invoked by uid 500); 13 Mar 2007 13:11:58 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 95820 invoked by uid 500); 13 Mar 2007 13:11:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 95805 invoked by uid 99); 13 Mar 2007 13:11:58 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 13 Mar 2007 06:11:58 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of davanum@gmail.com designates 64.233.184.232 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.233.184.232] (HELO wr-out-0506.google.com) (64.233.184.232) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 13 Mar 2007 06:11:46 -0700 Received: by wr-out-0506.google.com with SMTP id 55so2256145wri for ; Tue, 13 Mar 2007 06:11:26 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=ETragMZadpuF6ACg/GPOqSXrK/StBgm665Z3nn9tecpWbGz5tTOpjyIgUhOOBSKbyAmFNbY16AK79mcq9ckCMnvavYrCuCcivL6JX6KHNLse3O7fIdXw4L1NVln7f18rHp851RMqbl7Zxbq+HsheZrErpO13DuZuI3sk8Ur8/Ks= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:reply-to:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:references; b=kmVuWgNwv0SahHAA+631FeqRW9QKJopu0rx2OVbUktsgwC7dxF8cHyC3ESLA6zrL8ZpFQoCkuWY6O0VikuYV89mBQGwLvzccU2K+okABxhmMIN1kBK/NpCr7nhm0XazPL0+NzVVvXpvGeATU2U3qbvJyOjfBB417h1SYSgx9BZw= Received: by 10.114.60.19 with SMTP id i19mr2378904waa.1173791485598; Tue, 13 Mar 2007 06:11:25 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.133.10 with HTTP; Tue, 13 Mar 2007 06:11:25 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <19e0530f0703130611y75d7ee4sc9bf2e319b9db903@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 13 Mar 2007 09:11:25 -0400 From: "Davanum Srinivas" Reply-To: dims@apache.org To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: JAX-WS TCK and CXF 2.0 release In-Reply-To: <45F65D62.5060300@iona.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline References: <45F65D62.5060300@iona.com> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Bo, I believe this should be ok from a legal standpoint. thanks, dims On 3/13/07, Bozhong Lin wrote: > Hi, > > Apache CXF team is planning for its 2.0 final release. In benefit of CXF > users, we would like to cut 2.0 release sooner without fully passing > JAX-WS TCK, and plan to push JAX-WS TCK test into 2.1 release plan. Of > course, in CXF 2.0 release note, we will explicitly mention that Apache > CXF does NOT claim any JAX-WS compliant yet, like what we did with CXF > 2.0 M1 release. Is this plan OK to incubator PPMC from legal standpoint? > Any thoughts/opinion on this would be greatly appreciated. > > Thanks, > Bo > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org > > -- Davanum Srinivas :: http://wso2.org/ :: Oxygen for Web Services Developers --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org