+1 - that makes great sense Ean - thanks for laying it out like a towel. I have a question about this legal stuff - does only having licensing issues in the repo for a little bit count any less against us? Does it actually open us up to anything in any way? I really don't know the answer, so I'd love to here other thoughts on the topic.
I'm assuming that as soon as it's checked in, we're screwed, which means to me that we must do better at not to putting them into the repo at all - instead of cleaning them up in the future as this has happened numerous times on this effort. Anyways, any info on the matter would help me - so thanks in advance. Cheers, Ruppert -- Tim Ruppert HotWax Media http://www.hotwaxmedia.com o:801.649.6594 f:801.649.6595 On Dec 16, 2009, at 5:24 PM, Ean Schuessler wrote: > I'm not clear whether that solves the problem (and it is, indeed, a very > silly problem). The problem is that an FTL file would still be in > "source form" and that is where the issue is. We could have an even > sillier argument about whether and FTL file is "Turing complete" and, > therefore, data or code. I sure don't want to do that. > > I prefer Adam's suggestion that we compress the JSPs into a WAR and > claim that they are a "binary" in that state. I strongly suspect that we > will never hear a complaint from IBM on the matter and our action of > building the WAR would demonstrate a good faith effort to comply with > their license. > > Hans Bakker wrote: >> We will either remove or replace all jsp's wih ftl's of the birt >> component in the next few days... >> > -- > Ean Schuessler, CTO > [email protected] > 214-720-0700 x 315 > Brainfood, Inc. > http://www.brainfood.com >
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
