Hi, On Sat, Sep 27, 2008 at 7:10 PM, Davanum Srinivas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Since disclaimers are not part of the Apache License, they are no > obligated to. All we are trying to do here is to not let our folks use > a channel where it's not explicit. > > Even if all the other channels strip out all the incubator > disclaimers, there's nothing we can do about it. and is perfectly > legal. > > Am sure you know both of these...Not sure if you are trying to get me > to say something else :)
No sinister motives, I just wanted to make sure that we're on the same page. :-) So assuming we agree on the above, let's go back to the Maven issue. Consider an Ant project A that bundles an incubating release as a dependency in a lib directory that's included when you download the sources of A. This should be OK as discussed above, and the end user doesn't need to go through any extra steps to get the incubating dependency. Project A may choose to warn the user about the incubating dependency, but we don't mandate that. Then consider a Maven project B that declares a dependency to an incubating release. Now, according to current policy, the end user should explicitly allow incubating dependencies by adding special configuration before he or she can build project B sources. Why should things be more complex for the users of project B? I would better understand the objections against Maven distribution if the same standards were applied to all kinds of downstream projects and their users. BR, Jukka Zitting --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
