qpid-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Ross <justin.r...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: 0.24 release update - proposed final RC3
Date Fri, 23 Aug 2013 20:14:02 GMT

I've created RC4 with all the license patches that have come in so
far, and I'm going to raise a vote for it.  There are some important
caveats, however.

  - I'm starting a vacation in an hour, and I won't return until September 2nd.
  - It's not clear that all the license headers we need for release
are in place.

In the interest of expediency, I'll start the vote anyhow.  If you all
decide we've fixed the license headers well enough to proceed, cool.
Otherwise, I'll make a new RC when I return and we'll vote again.


On Fri, Aug 23, 2013 at 10:31 AM, Robbie Gemmell
<robbie.gemmell@gmail.com> wrote:
> For files written by us, the files themselves should be licenced.
> I'm not aware of any allowance for 'short form' (other than perhaps the
> link to the URL that is used for the 'Licence' field in things like
> manifest files, though as they are usually generated they dont strictly
> need licences), but it is perhaps worth asking someone who might be (e.g
> legal@).
> http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
> http://www.apache.org/dev/apply-licence.html
> Note also the no-copyright-notice discussion, I see the standalone licence
> file you mentioned also has a copyright statement in it.
> Robbie

>> On 23/08/13 14:51, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
>>> As Rob mentioned in his comment on QPID-4961, I noticed there are a number
>>> of new unlicenced files (various xml, html, css, js, md, java files
>>> primarily) spread across the tree that dont have licences and seem like
>>> they need to:
>>> http://people.apache.org/~**robbie/qpid/0.24/0.24rc3_rat_**output.txt<http://people.apache.org/~robbie/qpid/0.24/0.24rc3_rat_output.txt>
>>> Robbie

To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@qpid.apache.org

View raw message