Release votes cannot be vetoed, so it's just a vote against. If you have more +1's than -1's and you have at least 3 PMC folks saying +1, then you can release. However, if we do have an opportunity to clean something up here, we should take it. If we can just remove this file and move on without the cruft, I'd say let's do it. That way we don't have to have this conversation again, the next time we try to release this component.
On Mon, Jan 26, 2015 at 7:20 AM, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> wrote: > Ok so you only speak about dist src bundle? > > Not sure it does need to cancel the vote, this is not a major issue > IMO and can be fixed for next one > > > > > Romain Manni-Bucau > @rmannibucau > http://www.tomitribe.com > http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com > https://github.com/rmannibucau > > > 2015-01-26 12:39 GMT+01:00 sebb <[email protected]>: >> On 26 January 2015 at 11:30, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> @sebb: not sure I get it right, it references LICENSE.txt correctly for me >> >> Not sure what you mean by "it" above. >> >> As I already wrote: >> The NOTICE file should not reference LICENSE.txt >> Nor should it reference LICENSE.xerox, because the Xerox license does >> not require attribution. >> >> However LICENSE.txt must include - or point to as separate file(s) - >> any 3rd party licenses for bundled code. >> It does not reference xerox currently, so there is a problem which >> arises because of the source file. >> >> The user must be able to determine the licensing requirements from >> LICENSE and NOTICE without having to look around for other license >> files. >> And the NOTICE file must not contain anything that is not required. >> >>> >>> Romain Manni-Bucau >>> @rmannibucau >>> http://www.tomitribe.com >>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com >>> https://github.com/rmannibucau >>> >>> >>> 2015-01-26 12:27 GMT+01:00 sebb <[email protected]>: >>>> On 26 January 2015 at 11:19, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>> if that's the case +1 but anyway it doesnt hurt >>>> >>>> But it does have some consequences, because of the license issues. >>>> >>>>> @Thomas: before dropping it can you confirm it a last time please? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau >>>>> @rmannibucau >>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com >>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com >>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 2015-01-26 12:18 GMT+01:00 sebb <[email protected]>: >>>>>> Why not just drop it entirely? >>>>>> >>>>>> If that is the only Xerox-licensed file, it is not essential to the >>>>>> operation of JCS, so why keep it? >>>>>> >>>>>> On 25 January 2015 at 21:44, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> Hi Mark, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> this is not packaged AFAIK, just here as a sample I guess. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Romain Manni-Bucau >>>>>>> @rmannibucau >>>>>>> http://www.tomitribe.com >>>>>>> http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com >>>>>>> https://github.com/rmannibucau >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> 2015-01-25 22:35 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg <[email protected]>: >>>>>>>> is that all? >>>>>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/jcs/trunk/commons-jcs-core/src/aspect/org/apache/commons/Trace.aj >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Wouldn't it be actually quite easy to replace this? >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> LieGrue, >>>>>>>> strub >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On Sunday, 25 January 2015, 19:30, Thomas Vandahl <[email protected]> >>>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> > On 25.01.15 17:00, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: >>>>>>>>>> It does AFAIK - was not here and just propagated existing legal >>>>>>>>>> text - and >>>>>>>>>> that is why it is referenced in core and not all artifacts. >>>>>>>>>> Le 25 janv. 2015 16:55, "sebb" <[email protected]> a écrit >>>>>>>>> : >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The XEROX license relates to the file >>>>>>>>> /commons-jcs-core/src/aspect/org/apache/commons/Trace.aj >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If the file continues to be part of the distribution, the license file >>>>>>>>> must be present, at least that is my understanding of the Apache >>>>>>>>> requirements. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> This was discussed at length when JCS 1.3 was released. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Bye, Thomas. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >>> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
