On 26 January 2015 at 17:38, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> wrote: > Sebb, this is nowhere stated in the bylaws. There is just no ground for > totally blasting a release!
This has come up several times, and the rules are still at: http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice > It's superfluous and not 100% perfect but it is NOT wrong. The sources > _currenty_ contain this file, so we have it. The NOTICE file is still wrong, because it contains stuff that should not be there. > For how long is this now in the codebase? 2 years? even longer? Irrelevant. Besides, I already noted the problem during the vote for RC2. I should not have to argue the case again. > Be glad that Romain finally cleans this up. > It's not perfect but it's also not a show stopper. And instead of ranting you > could have easily fixed it in SVN in the meantime. Some of it I could have fixed and could still fix. But I do not have the information needed to determine if a Xerox license is still required, so could not complete the work. > LieGrue, > strub > > > > > > >> On Monday, 26 January 2015, 17:59, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > On 26 January 2015 at 16:47, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >>> 2015-01-26 17:41 GMT+01:00 sebb <seb...@gmail.com>: >>>> On 26 January 2015 at 12:20, Romain Manni-Bucau >> <rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> Ok so you only speak about dist src bundle? >>>> >>>> No, it also affects the binary bundle, and it affects the SVN tag >>>> (which is also a distribution, though not a release) >>>> >>> >>> Not the bundle since aspectj files are not here and keeping xerox >>> reference is not an issue just something we should avoid if possible >>> nor the tag since the tag is fine (the tag uses module license and >>> global one - bundle - doesnt make any sense). So it only affects >>> sources one. >> >> The NOTICE file is wrong, whether or not the xerox file is included. >> NOTICE files must not contain spurious text. >> >> This affects the source and binary bundles and the jars (binary and source) >> >>>>> Not sure it does need to cancel the vote, this is not a major issue >>>>> IMO and can be fixed for next one >>>> >>>> Given how infrequently releases are made, I don't think that is a >> good idea. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> 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 <seb...@gmail.com>: >>>>>> On 26 January 2015 at 11:30, Romain Manni-Bucau >> <rmannibu...@gmail.com> 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 <seb...@gmail.com>: >>>>>>>> On 26 January 2015 at 11:19, Romain Manni-Bucau >> <rmannibu...@gmail.com> 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 >> <seb...@gmail.com>: >>>>>>>>>> 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 >> <rmannibu...@gmail.com> 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 >> <strub...@yahoo.de>: >>>>>>>>>>>> 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 <t...@apache.org> 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" <seb...@gmail.com> 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: >> dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: >> dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> >>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: >> dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: >> dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: >> dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: >> dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: >> dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: >> dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: >> dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>>> >>>> >>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>>> >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >>> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@commons.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@commons.apache.org
