incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Santiago Gala <santiago.g...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Approve the release of Shindig Incubator 1.0
Date Fri, 22 May 2009 16:00:20 GMT
El jue, 21-05-2009 a las 07:03 -0400, Upayavira escribió:
> I am a mentor for Shindig, but I am aware of a weaknesses of mine as a
> mentor is that I'm not that knowledgeable or experienced with the
> release process at Apache, and therefore have not followed this thread
> in detail, which I really should have.
> 
> It seems that this release is stalled, but I am not entirely sure how,
> and want to understand this better.
> 
> The thing that confuses me is that, as I understand it, Shindig is just
> using Maven to produce its artefacts (binary jars as a convenience to
> users). If that is the case, surely those artefacts are structured in
> the same way as other Maven based releases from other projects?
> 
> Is it that we have identified a new issue that actually affects _all_
> Maven based releases, not just Shindig? If so, how can we both unblock
> the Shindig release and also get this issue resolved in such a way as it
> covers all Maven based projects?
> 

+1

Regards
Santiago, who has been biting his lips about not agreeing with the guy
complaining in a blog entry about bureaucracy @apache, but it is more
and more difficult as his lips are starting to bleed :P

> Upayavira
> 
> On Tue, 2009-05-12 at 13:25 +0100, sebb wrote:
> > On 12/05/2009, Vincent Siveton <vincent.siveton@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > 2009/5/12 sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com>:
> > >
> > > >>  I was reliably informed that this was discussed on the Maven list
in March
> > >  >> 2008 (subject: legal-discuss)  and for binary distributions that
are created
> > >  >> by the war packager that contained 3rd party libraries the DEPENDENCIES
file
> > >  >> was sufficient to comply with ASF rules.
> > >  >
> > >  > The Maven list is not the place for definitive advice.
> > >  >
> > >  > If there are any doubts, these should be raised on the legal-discuss
list.
> > >
> > >
> > > Sure, it is why it was discussed on dev@maven AND legal-discuss@
> > >  http://legal-discuss.markmail.org/message/g2elchg5iwqnif6m
> > 
> > Thanks for the pointer.
> > 
> > The thread includes the statement:
> > 
> > " Given that I said that rolling up LICENSE and NOTICE files for
> > artifacts that assemble and contain other artifacts such as wars and
> > ears is out of scope for this proposal,"
> > 
> > so I'm not convinced that the thread applies here.
> > 
> > But even if it does, Henry Yandell wrote:
> > 
> > "Let's say I include a few of the jars in my distribution, but not all.
> > Then I'll need to add some of the LICENSE files and not other."
> > 
> > >  Shindig uses the org.apache:apache-jar-resource-bundle:1.4 which is
> > >  AFAIK compliant with the requirements discussed on legal-discuss.
> > 
> > I'm not convinced.
> > 
> > It may be that the 3rd party jars don't need to be mentioned in
> > NOTICE, but I'm sure that their licences need to be included in the
> > LICENSE file.
> > 
> > >  Cheers,
> > >
> > >
> > >  Vincent
> > >
> 
> 
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message