mina-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alex Karasulu" <akaras...@apache.org>
Subject [Release] Javassist is OK for now (was: Fwd: Cliff's page on 3rd party policy)
Date Sat, 16 Feb 2008 00:00:06 GMT
Yes!  We're OK to release M1.  We should definitely make sure we run RAT.

Alex

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Sam Ruby <rubys@apache.org>
Date: Feb 15, 2008 6:36 PM
Subject: Re: Cliff's page on 3rd party policy
To: members@apache.org


On Feb 15, 2008 6:13 PM, Alex Karasulu <akarasulu@apache.org> wrote:
> Ok great - if there are no objections I'm going to forward this to a
project
> mailing list.

You are welcome to do so.

> Thanks,
> Alex
>
> On Feb 15, 2008 5:31 PM, Sam Ruby <rubys@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On Feb 15, 2008 5:26 PM, Alex Karasulu <akarasulu@apache.org> wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I was just looking at this page because folks on different PMCs have
> cited
> > > it as official ASF policy around 3rd party licensing:
> > >
> > >    http://people.apache.org/~cliffs/3party.html<http://people.apache.org/%7Ecliffs/3party.html>
> > >
> > > I thought this work or some subset of it was what the board is
currently
> > > reviewing to determine our official policy.  Hence all the mega
threads
> > > around it.
> >
> > Here is a (minor) update:
> >
> > http://people.apache.org/~rubys/3party.html<http://people.apache.org/%7Erubys/3party.html>
> >
> > > Am I wrong? Is this page our official policy right now?
> >
> > No, it isn't official just yet.
> >
> >
> > > Also if a project is preparing for a release and there's a transient
> > > dependency on an MPL licensed binary, then does the board recommend we
> wait
> > > until the policy is solidified before the next board meeting?
> >
> > Don't wait.
> >
> > - Sam Ruby

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message