On 16/04/2009, Todd Volkert <tvolk...@gmail.com> wrote: > 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
s/tag/branch/ ? > the branch to the tag), which can be found at: > > http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/pivot/tags/v1.1/ Thanks. The SVN tag now agrees with the source archive contents. > 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. AFAICS the archives look OK, so no objections from me. > 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 > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
