Ok, per the recommendations on the legal-discuss thread and here (and just to make sure we're fully in keeping with the spirit of ASF policies), I've removed the offending files from the tag (and copied the branch to the tag), which can be found at:
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/pivot/tags/v1.1/ Note: I did NOT regenerate the release archives because there's no need - nothing has changed from their perspective. This only related to what was in SVN that *wasn't* part of the release artifacts. Thus, I am not calling for a new vote -- the existing vote should proceed as planned. Thanks everyone for taking the time to look at this. I appreciate the due diligence you're putting into this, because I know it takes time to review someone else's release, and it's making the end result that much more solid. -T p.s. on the trunk, we've just migrated the demos sub-project and the JFreeChart provider off of the ASF repository for good (see http://code.google.com/p/pivot-demos/ and http://code.google.com/p/pivot-jfree/). We have multiple contributors working on various demos at any given time, and I'm not confident that relying on each of them to be a licensing expert is remotely workable, so it's much easier just to say "Pivot is at ASF -- demo applications for Pivot are at Google Code". On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 2:00 PM, Todd Volkert <tvolk...@gmail.com> wrote: > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/200904.mbox/browser > > Summary: > (a) Some consider SVN to be part of your distribution, and some don't, > so there's no true resolution there > (b) Per http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html#transition-incubator, > this weighs on us less because we're an incubating project that had > these dependencies before we joined the ASF. > > Bottom line: > We'll remove those dependencies from SVN altogether in the trunk (and > thus for all future releases) by migrating them to Google Code -- just > to make sure there's no ambiguity about what's ASF-compliant and > what's not. But in the meantime, based on the two points above, this > shouldn't hold up the 1.1 release. > > -T > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 12:13 PM, Todd Volkert <tvolk...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> We don't have any LGPL libraries in the distribution - only in SVN, for >>> some demos that aren't actually included in the distribution artifacts. >> >> Or dependencies of any kind, for that mater. The actual *release* is >> compliant with ASF's policies. If our SVN repository is not, that >> will be fixed as soon as I get an answer from legal, and I can strip >> out the code from the trunk as well as the tag, but all the while, the >> tarballs and zip files were compliant. >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
