incubator-stdcxx-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Martin Sebor <>
Subject Re: STDCXX progress to graduation
Date Mon, 25 Jun 2007 14:53:06 GMT
Leo Simons wrote:
> On Jun 23, 2007, at 10:06 PM, Martin Sebor wrote:
>> Leo Simons wrote:
>>> I also believe/hope the status file might need an update or perhaps two:
>>>   In progress
>>>        Check and make sure that the files that have been donated have
>>>          been updated to reflect the new ASF copyright.
>>> I'd hope that was finished a while ago :-)
>> It got started but we never did go through all the files to check
>> that we didn't miss any (which we of course did).
> :-(
>> I just finished
>> a sweep through our sources and updated those that still needed
>> it. The record of the changes is here:
> So, does this mean that there's files in any of the tarballs listed at
> that have an incorrect license header?

Incorrect might be too strong a word. IMO, "different" would
describe it better.

> If so, you should be thinking about what to do with those releases -- 
> like do a branch where you fix the headers and release new, 
> versions to replace them, or simply pull the 4.1.x releases and 
> get 4.2 out quickly, or decide there really can't possibly be any 
> problems for the users but add a warning to be safe, or successfully 
> argue there's nothing that needs to be done, or whatever.

I'd like to argue that nothing needs to be done :)

The files are all licensed under the ASL, it's just that the text
is subtly (but in my layman opinion not substantively) different
from the most recent text at

> I think you're blessed with mentors that can offer some very expertish 
> insights into how to deal with things like this :-)

We couldn't agree more.


View raw message