To add my 5ct to the discussion.
I don't quite understand, why we have to remove the old header anyway ... shouldn't it be possible to add the Apache header (would sort of be both in there) ... the Patch file itself should have an Apache Header, I think. But the resulting file shouldn't have the old header removed. Chris ________________________________ Von: Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> Gesendet: Dienstag, 6. September 2016 09:17:47 An: dev@flex.apache.org Betreff: Re: [DISCUSS] Discuss Release Apache Flex FalconJX 0.7.0 RC1 Hi, > I looked over the artifacts and noticed that the flexjs-maven-plugin > sources are not in the source package. However, it appears the > flexjs-maven-plugin sources are in the source.jar for flexjs-maven-plugin, > so I think we can just consider that source.jar as one of the artefacts. You might want to add the links to the missing source code in the vote thread, I’m not sure we could release these extra bits without those sources have been looked by the PMC and voted on if they are missing from the current source release. > BTW, I am thinking that if we have a majority vote by my Wednesday When you have time would you mind responding with your thoughts to the outstanding patch file issue (3rd party headers being removed), that seems reasonably serious to me. Thanks, Justin
