yes, that would be a good option and seems reasonable from my perspective
Le dimanche 17 juillet 2011, Benson Margulies a écrit :
> Well, I'm not a PMC member, so I'll just follow instructions. Someone
> might wonder if, given the progressive calm that has settled over the
> trademark business, pe
Well, I'm not a PMC member, so I'll just follow instructions. Someone
might wonder if, given the progressive calm that has settled over the
trademark business, perhaps Sonatype might go back to dual-licensing
if asked?
On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 5:36 PM, Hervé BOUTEMY wrote:
> Good question :)
>
> C
Good question :)
Current Maven versions (3.0.3 and 3.0.4-SNAPSHOT) use Aether 1.11, which has a
dual EPL/ASLv2 license [1].
As far new versions of Aether stay under ASLv2 license, there is no question
for Maven when upgrading dependency.
Now, Aether 1.12 was released under EPL license only, and
Folks,
I've submitted one tiny fix to Aether, and I have a feature proposal
I'm discussing with the proprietor: making the *-pattern in mirrors a
bit richer.
Eventually, this would be 'as simple' as a change to the aether
provider to take a newer aether. However, I wonder if the PMC has
establish
