Just getting the reminder in "early" --- those projects reporting in August,
please start working on and posting your reports.
--- Noel
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL
Talk with Stefano. This is very much his area, and there are already a few
projects that would have support data and infrastructure.
--- Noel
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail:
On 8/1/07, Martin Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > This is about sources, not binaries, right? If you don't include
> > the source but only the binary (.jar), then the situation might
> > be different.
>
> It's my understanding that the same applies to both source and binary. But
> you're co
On 8/1/07, Roland Weber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > From:
> >
> > http://www.apache.org/dev/apply-license.html#new
> >
> > "you should append their license(s) to the LICENSE file at the top of
> the
> > distribution, or at least put a pointer in the LICENSE file to the
> > third-party license"
> From:
>
> http://www.apache.org/dev/apply-license.html#new
>
> "you should append their license(s) to the LICENSE file at the top of the
> distribution, or at least put a pointer in the LICENSE file to the
> third-party license"
You didn't quote the beginning of the paragraph:
> If the distrib
On 7/31/07, Martin Cooper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Actually I was wondering about this recommendation of having all (non
> > ASL)
> > license files for dependencies in a *single* LICENSE file. It seems to
> > me
> > that it's a maintenance nightmare when you have a lot of dependencies
