> Not yet tested but is there someone who could have a look at this one : > https://jira.codehaus.org/browse/MNG-5492 > This regression seems strange >
I can't reproduce that issue. Introducing an error in the global settings.xml makes Maven 3.1.0 fail on my MBP. /Anders > > > On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 2:29 PM, Stephen Connolly < > stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > +1 > > > > > > On 4 July 2013 20:35, Stephen Connolly <stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com > > >wrote: > > > > > I am withdrawing my -1 on the basis of the feedback I have received > from > > > legal-discuss. > > > > > > My vote is now +0 as I have not tested the distribution and I am > waiting > > > for somebody else on the PMC to do the running and make a call on > whether > > > we need to fix the NOTICE file for this release. > > > > > > I intend testing the distribution tomorrow unless this vote gets > > cancelled > > > ;-) > > > > > > - Stephen > > > > > > > > > On Thursday, 4 July 2013, Jason van Zyl wrote: > > > > > >> Fair enough. > > >> > > >> On Jul 4, 2013, at 8:59 AM, Stephen Connolly < > > >> stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > > >> > I will let Barrie decide on whether we *have to* cancel this vote > > >> because > > >> > of the issues he identified in the NOTICE file. > > >> > > > >> > Until I hear back from legal-discuss, I do not know whether the test > > >> data > > >> > issue has any changes required, so I do not know whether (on the > bits > > I > > >> am > > >> > focusing) there is a requirement for us to respin yet, so from my > > point > > >> of > > >> > view I am ok with keeping the vote open until I hear back from > > >> > legal-discuss on the test data issue... but if Barrie's view is that > > >> with > > >> > the current NOTICE we cannot release, then no choice but to cancel > the > > >> vote > > >> > now. > > >> > > > >> > I'd rather have a vote open to pester legal for a more prompt answer > > >> (from > > >> > a bunch of volunteers on the 4th of July weekend) than have no vote > to > > >> push > > >> > them with. > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > On 4 July 2013 13:54, Jason van Zyl <ja...@tesla.io> wrote: > > >> > > > >> >> Then just make the changes you see fit and I'll roll it again. It > > will > > >> >> only take a few minutes. If we know what it should be like then we > > >> might as > > >> >> well just do it, as it's likely to take less time than asking if an > > >> >> exception can be made. > > >> >> > > >> >> I can cancel the vote. Make the changes you think are required for > > >> >> compliance and I'll cut it again. > > >> >> > > >> >> On Jul 4, 2013, at 6:05 AM, Stephen Connolly < > > >> >> stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> >> > > >> >>> I have asked the legal-discuss list for an opinion on test data > sets > > >> and > > >> >>> license headers. From my reading of the current ASF position: > > >> >>> http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html#faq-exceptions we do > > not > > >> >>> currently have an exception for test data sets. > > >> >>> > > >> >>> Pending the outcome of that discussion I will have to be > > >> >>> > > >> >>> -1 > > >> >>> > > >> >>> If the outcome is that we do not need to do anything for test data > > >> sets, > > >> >>> then I would be happy to switch to +1. > > >> >>> > > >> >>> If the outcome is that we need to add some additional text to the > > >> NOTICE > > >> >>> files to cover the test data sets, then we will need to respin as > > >> nobody > > >> >> on > > >> >>> the PMC can vote +1 if we are aware that the release is in > violation > > >> of > > >> >> the > > >> >>> ASF policies and we would be neglecting our governance role. > > >> >>> > > >> >>> If the outcome is that we need to add the license headers to all > the > > >> test > > >> >>> data files, then I think the PMC will have to review what we want > to > > >> do > > >> >> as > > >> >>> adding license headers to every file in the test data set runs the > > >> risk > > >> >> of > > >> >>> invalidating the test data and that is an unnecessary risk that > > would > > >> >>> cripple the project and as such I would be looking for the ASF to > > >> change > > >> >>> such a decision and provide us with a means of using the NOTICE > file > > >> to > > >> >>> cover the test data. > > >> >>> > > >> >>> I hate being petty, but unfortunately that is part of the > governance > > >> role > > >> >>> that the PMC is tasked with... :-( > > >> >>> > > >> >>> - Stephen > > >> >>> > > >> >>> > > >> >>> On 1 July 2013 03:56, Barrie Treloar <baerr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> >>> > > >> >>>> On 1 July 2013 06:52, sebb <seb...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> >>>>> Another problem: the NOTICE file contains the following spurious > > >> text: > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >> > > >> > > ========================================================================= > > >> >>>>> == NOTICE file corresponding to the section 4 d of > > >> >>>> == > > >> >>>>> == the Apache License, Version 2.0, > > >> >>>> == > > >> >>>>> == in this case for the Apache Maven distribution. > > >> >>>> == > > >> >>>>> > > >> >>>> > > >> >> > > >> > > ========================================================================= > > >> >>>>We know what we are, but know not what we may be. > > >> > > >> -- Shakespeare > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > > > > -- > > > Sent from my phone > > > > > > > > > -- > ----- > Arnaud Héritier > http://aheritier.net > Mail/GTalk: aheritier AT gmail DOT com > Twitter/Skype : aheritier >
