On Wed, Sep 18, 2013 at 5:49 PM, Eric Yang <eric...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you Elder for filing the LEGAL-178. Tim, the link provided is for > source file headers and reference to Apache distribution of source code > tarball. We will wait for LEGAL-178 to be resolved to react. This implies > that Apache OpenOffice is also not doing the right thing. OpenOffice has > its license translated to multiple languages, hence LICENSE and NOTICE > files are not at top level. We should plan to make the system scale and > improve upon. We can plan to make course correction for future release. > The existing artifacts have been released for years, and it may not be the > best interest of Apache Foundation to recall those artifacts. There could > be users who depends on them. Binary artifacts did not violate any license > terms. We appreciate your understanding on the subject at hand.
Why not just push out a bugfix release? As Tim and Luciano have already stated, artifacts which were not voted on by the IPMC cannot continue to be distributed though our channels. Doing nothing is not acceptable. Hashing things out on the Chukwa dev list is fine so long as the eventual outcome conforms to current ASF and Incubator policies. Marvin Humphrey --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
