incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Justin Erenkrantz" <>
Subject Re: [VOTE] graduate stdcxx to TLP
Date Sun, 14 Oct 2007 00:06:39 GMT
On Oct 13, 2007 4:28 PM, Noel J. Bergman <> wrote:
> I feel that we start down a slippery slope when we graduate projects which are "not yet"
compliant, but "will be".  When?  Craig points out that it has been some months since the
issue was raised by you, and it is still not resolved.  Hence:

Who said it wasn't compliant?  It is [1] - and it was one of the first
projects to be in compliance in general with the updated licensing
requirements that Cliff drew up.

Your objection is solely about running a tool (which isn't documented
or linked to anywhere) to *prove* the compliance rather than looking
through it yourself - and that has nothing to do with the state of the
community and whether the podling should graduate.

FWIW, I just ran RAT and stdcxx is fine.  RAT is largely flagging the
automated test suite files output as missing the licenses.  These
particular files are used as a comparison so it can't have the license
text anyway or risk screwing up the tests.   IMO, there's nothing here
to warrant vetoing or tabling the graduation vote.  As I said before,
we can (and will) go through it with a fine-tooth comb before the
release; but the state of the licensing notices is comparable with any
other ASF project and graduation doesn't deserve to be held hostage to
some unreasonable expectations.  -- justin

1. Just see
and others.


Notes: 4
Binaries: 125
Archives: 0
Standards: 2818

Apache Licensed: 2676
Generated Documents: 0

JavaDocs are generated and so license header is optional
Generated files do not required license headers

142 Unknown Licenses

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message