@JB: oki cancelling as mentionned
Romain Manni-Bucau @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau> | Blog <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/> | Old Blog <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com> | Github <https://github.com/rmannibucau> | LinkedIn <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau> | Book <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8-high-performance> 2018-03-19 8:09 GMT+01:00 Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]>: > Fair enough for me. > > About my e-mail, it's just a question of wording: just don't use "veto" ;) > > Regards > JB > > On 19/03/2018 07:43, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: > >> I know but releasing with a -1 is irrespect for the community and I dont >> want to pass in force for a notice. Will recreate it later today. >> >> Is it ok to put a readme.adoc for you in metainf? >> >> >> Le 19 mars 2018 07:27, "Jean-Baptiste Onofré" <[email protected] <mailto: >> [email protected]>> a écrit : >> >> Hi, >> >> there's no veto for release, even with a -1. So, if you are fine >> with this and address in next release, we can proceed. >> >> Regards >> JB >> >> On 18/03/2018 21:39, Romain Manni-Bucau wrote: >> >> Up John? Are you ok to change your vote to a -0 and not veto the >> release since we are good legally but just didnt respect a good >> practise? >> >> If not I can rerun the release tomorrow and add another not >> standard file to replace our notice mention but i dont see any >> reason to require another vote for that for now. >> >> >> Le 15 mars 2018 07:11, "Romain Manni-Bucau" >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> a >> écrit : >> >> @John: is it ok to keep it for this release and have >> another discuss >> thread about it for you - legally we are ok anyway? >> >> >> Romain Manni-Bucau >> @rmannibucau <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau >> <https://twitter.com/rmannibucau>> | Blog >> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/ >> <https://rmannibucau.metawerx.net/>> | Old Blog >> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com >> <http://rmannibucau.wordpress.com>> | Github >> <https://github.com/rmannibucau >> <https://github.com/rmannibucau>> | LinkedIn >> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau >> <https://www.linkedin.com/in/rmannibucau>> | Book >> <https://www.packtpub.com/appl >> ication-development/java-ee-8-high-performance >> <https://www.packtpub.com/application-development/java-ee-8- >> high-performance>> >> >> 2018-03-15 1:17 GMT+01:00 Mark Struberg <[email protected] >> <mailto:[email protected]> >> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>>: >> >> I see. Note that the updated guideline does say 'need >> not' and >> not 'MUST NOT'. >> Yes we should probably remove it. But no, it's not a show >> stopper imo. >> >> LieGrue, >> strub >> >> > Am 15.03.2018 um 01:01 schrieb John D. Ament >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>>: >> > >> > >> > >> > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 7:54 PM John D. Ament >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> >> wrote: >> > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 7:43 PM Mark Struberg >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> wrote: >> > +1 it's not incorrect. Please read the BSD3c license >> > >> > > 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the >> above >> copyright >> > > notice, this list of conditions and the following >> disclaimer. >> > > >> > > 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce >> the above >> copyright >> > > notice, this list of conditions and the following >> disclaimer in the >> > > documentation and/or other materials provided >> with the >> distribution. >> > >> > It needs noticing. That's why we put it into NOTICE ;) >> > >> > +1 from me. >> > >> > >> > Sorry but you're incorrect. The copyright claim is >> already >> present by copying in their license file. >> > >> > BTW here's a legal ticket explain what should and >> should not >> go into a notice file >> > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-262 >> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-262> >> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-262 >> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-262>> >> > >> > There's an explicit call out to MIT and BSD being >> excluded. >> > >> > >> > >> > LieGrue, >> > strub >> > >> > >> > > Am 14.03.2018 um 19:00 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>>: >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > Le 14 mars 2018 18:51, "John D. Ament" >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> a >> écrit : >> > > ASF policy is that NOTICE files are present when the >> consumed product includes a NOTICE file. In BSD-3-Clause >> products, the copyright statement (including download >> link) is >> in the license file. So its enough to list it there. >> > > >> > > My vote: -1 due to incorrect NOTICE file. >> > > >> > > It is not incorrect since the license is >> particular it must >> be in notice to be able to put all parts together on >> user side. >> If you dont you let users do again this job which is >> insanely bad. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 1:46 PM Romain Manni-Bucau >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> >> wrote: >> > > >> > > >> > > Le 14 mars 2018 18:30, "John D. Ament" >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> a >> écrit : >> > > Why does the NOTICE file in the resulting JAR (for >> the ASM >> shaded dependency) include >> > > >> > > This product includes software developed at >> > > OW2 Consortium (http://asm.ow2.org/) >> > > >> > > There is no notice file associated with ASM 6.1, so >> we >> should not need to declare any notice. >> > > >> > > Well it is not an asf licensed software nor an asf >> project >> so it is no bad IMHO to list it here. Also their >> website look a >> bit outdated so I was not sure it was that ok to >> completely drop it. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 12:54 PM Romain Manni-Bucau >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> >> wrote: >> > > yep, as written ;) >> > > >> > > >> > > Romain Manni-Bucau >> > > @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | >> LinkedIn | Book >> > > >> > > 2018-03-14 17:51 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>>: >> > > Romain, >> > > >> > > as far as I have seen, there is only the ASM >> upgrade, right? >> > > >> > > Le mer. 14 mars 2018 à 17:49, Romain Manni-Bucau >> <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]> >> <mailto:[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>> a >> écrit : >> > > Hi! >> > > >> > > Please VOTE for the release of Apache XBean-4.7. >> > > >> > > Here is the staging repo: >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache >> geronimo-1049 >> <https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapach >> egeronimo-1049> >> <https://repository.apache.org >> /content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1049 >> <https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapach >> egeronimo-1049>> >> > > The source distribution can be found here: >> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapache >> geronimo-1049/org/apache/xbean/xbean/4.7/xbean-4.7-source-release.zip >> <https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapach >> egeronimo-1049/org/apache/xbean/xbean/4.7/xbean-4.7-source-release.zip> >> <https://repository.apache.org >> /content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1049/org/apache/ >> xbean/xbean/4.7/xbean-4.7-source-release.zip >> <https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapach >> egeronimo-1049/org/apache/xbean/xbean/4.7/xbean-4.7-source-release.zip>> >> > > sha1 is ea25f3fda5d9abea891a62abf738d1024f289dd5 >> > > >> > > Change is only about upgrade asm to 6.1 (java 10). >> > > >> > > [+1] ship it >> > > [+0] meh, don’t care >> > > [-1] nope, stop because ${reason} >> > > >> > > The VOTE is open for 72h. >> > > >> > > Here is my +1. >> > > >> > > >> > > Romain Manni-Bucau >> > > @rmannibucau | Blog | Old Blog | Github | >> LinkedIn | Book >> > > >> > > >> > > >> >> >>
