metron-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Foley <ma...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Mtron Project Maturity
Date Fri, 20 Jan 2017 18:15:45 GMT
James, looks great overall.  A few nits, and two fixes:

CD10 – “under under” – de-dup.

CD30 – “is can be” - delete “is”

CD50 – “First, is” –  “is” should be “it is”

LC50 – This doesn’t exactly answer the question.  It is a question about copyright, not
licensing.  (eg, see the NOTICE files in github)


A better response would be:
“We document copyrights of all included source code in compliance with Apache licensing
standards.”  

RE40 – It is not correct that we don’t distribute convenience binaries.  We are in the
process of adding RPMs to the sub-components that don’t already have them.  A better response
would be:
“Although we do provide convenience binaries for some parts of the project releases, (a)
each release can be fully built from sources and used without reference to the convenience
binaries, and (b) the convenience binaries are documented to not be warranted or guaranteed
in any way.”
It might be advisable to check the documentation to confirm (b).

QU30 – “identified addressed” – insert “and”
“the Metron's” – delete “the”

QU50 – “Metorn” – should be “Metron”


Thanks,
--Matt


On 1/20/17, 9:38 AM, "James Sirota" <jsirota@apache.org> wrote:

    Guys,
    
    I went through the Apache Project Maturity document and documented how Metron meets each
of these criteria.  My draft is available here.  What do you guys think?  Anything you would
like to add/revise about this?
    
    https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=66852119
    
    
    ------------------- 
    Thank you,
    
    James Sirota
    PPMC- Apache Metron (Incubating)
    jsirota AT apache DOT org
    
    



Mime
View raw message