It'd be hard to argue it's an expressive work imo, thus even with a header
there would be nothing licensable.
Hen
On Sun, Sep 1, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Benedikt Ritter wrote:
> Does the .gitignore file need an AL header?
>
> -- Forwarded message --
> From:
> Date: 2013/9/1
> Subjec
I favor IAE, but I want to make sure we re-visit the decision made for
[lang] when it chose to use NPE instead.
On Sun, Sep 1, 2013 at 1:37 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:
> It feels to me that this misrepresents the ideas expressed here, or at
> least mine ;) I am neither indifferent or favor NPE. I fav
It feels to me that this misrepresents the ideas expressed here, or at
least mine ;) I am neither indifferent or favor NPE. I favor IAE, so
does that mean I am nor "most people". If a person make these kinds of
statement, we might as well VOTE or argue-discuss some more...!
Gary
On Sep 1, 2013, a
Does the .gitignore file need an AL header?
-- Forwarded message --
From:
Date: 2013/9/1
Subject: svn commit: r1519292 - in /commons/proper/lang/trunk: .gitignore
pom.xml src/changes/changes.xml
To: comm...@commons.apache.org
Author: britter
Date: Sun Sep 1 17:01:30 2013
New Re
Look's like most people are either indifferent or favor NPE. So, do we
change this for [CSV]? The important thing is to give users an expressive
message.
Benedikt
2013/8/30 Gary Gregory
> Surprisingly, a lot. At work, we have a lot of frameworky/plugin-type of
> code where we run operations o
I have removed the fallback in revision 1519269.
2013/8/31 Gary Gregory
> On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 10:45 AM, Benedikt Ritter >wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > in r1518802 [1] I have introduced some parameter validation. This was the
> > result of a discussion we had some time ago [2], where we agreed t
