On 16/04/2009, ant elder <ant.elder@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 4:34 PM, Todd Volkert <tvolkert@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Actually, it occurs to me that since the distribution archives don't
> > have the offending code, we should be able to release 1.1 as packaged
> > (pending the vote), and if legal-discuss says that we need to remove
> > that stuff from SVN, that can be done after the fact.
> >
> > -T
> >
> >
>
> I agree.
Disagree.
There are rules as to what 3rd party dependencies are allowed.
For example, LGPL dependencies cannot be included in distributions;
furthermore, any such dependencies must be optional. That is not
something that can be fixed later.
See
http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
> These artifacts look ok to me now. Would be helpful to include RAT reports
> for both the src and binary distributions next time.
>
> +1
>
>
> ...ant
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
|