From dev-return-20455-apmail-mina-dev-archive=mina.apache.org@mina.apache.org Thu Jul 22 03:18:42 2010 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-mina-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 6577 invoked from network); 22 Jul 2010 03:18:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 22 Jul 2010 03:18:42 -0000 Received: (qmail 52855 invoked by uid 500); 22 Jul 2010 03:18:42 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-mina-dev-archive@mina.apache.org Received: (qmail 52501 invoked by uid 500); 22 Jul 2010 03:18:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@mina.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@mina.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@mina.apache.org Received: (qmail 52488 invoked by uid 99); 22 Jul 2010 03:18:38 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 03:18:38 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of paliwalashish@gmail.com designates 209.85.213.43 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.213.43] (HELO mail-yw0-f43.google.com) (209.85.213.43) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 22 Jul 2010 03:18:32 +0000 Received: by ywf7 with SMTP id 7so1270388ywf.2 for ; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 20:17:22 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=urUwmxsocELNlx3bqsLOnj45r8WuhziIjTlbhdjrBxk=; b=fMCpXxGw6+wdeN9Azel8IO1K0LtvM6zqor5CmHuFs15xAksGqzoKMRGiwC+2WEJiWo NEiCU8S/9SwgzSkRBGi2tbI3HxDnfFLp530dTL0tlz0Kf4eyk+Dxr1B6eQcIj8VxY/TL TZCaFsp11ENcE/c4meF5/3XzjfQaFsCKH+f0k= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=WvTi2Iw9WmQhBJgvJG81n3HpsQ6I7z0jPrmuXKkOYyF37i/fDfM9+0o/q/iRrJXgcH poJxN7EbPHX3JbBykOs5tYt7Tl/Wl39HzSiOUh4Le3oJwvWRszzddopPtz3H/kzqG+lP D6xbgO7LCR8EavhE+xSAR/ksWwthAOkDJIBuA= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.224.28.145 with SMTP id m17mr851612qac.118.1279768642204; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 20:17:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.253.15 with HTTP; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 20:17:22 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <4C474992.9020608@apache.org> Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2010 08:47:22 +0530 Message-ID: Subject: Re: removed releases with LGPL From: Ashish To: dev@mina.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 3:23 AM, Niklas Gustavsson w= rote: > On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 11:31 PM, Sam Ruby wrote= : >> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 5:03 PM, Niklas Gustavsson wrote: >>> On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 9:25 PM, Doug Cutting wrot= e: >>>> Niklas & the MINA PMC: =A0In this month's report from MINA to the boar= d, you >>>> mentioned that you removed from archive.apache.org past releases that >>>> mistakenly included items under the LGPL. =A0In the future, please do = not >>>> remove such releases unless their distribution is in fact illegal. Inc= luding >>>> items under the LGPL in releases is not illegal, just against Apache p= olicy. >>> >>> We got a backup of the removed releases. So, if I understand >>> correctly, the best option would be to restore these? >> >> No objections here. =A0Beyond that, it is a MINA PMC decision. =A0If I >> were on that PMC, my take is that it would be in the best interest of >> existing users if the releases were still available. > > As seen above, the board has provided feedback the we do not need to > remove the releases which contains the LGPL licensed file. Since I got > a backup, does anyone object to me restoring this? If I do, I'll add a > notice on our download page that M4-M6 contains a LGPL file and users > should be aware. +1 So do we have another release without these libs? - ashish