Hi,
> We included exact copies of LICENSE file of depending projects.
> We can alternatively use LICENSE.ASLv2 Instead of using exact copies
> (if there are no diffs).
Yes the standard Apache license (ALv2) has the same text so no need to include
it multiple time if that is the case. [1] Note ho
Hi Willem,
We included exact copies of LICENSE file of depending projects.
We can alternatively use LICENSE.ASLv2 Instead of using exact copies
(if there are no diffs).
It's up to you in my understanding.
Thanks,
Makoto
2018-03-03 22:40 GMT+09:00 Willem Jiang :
> Hi，
>
> I found the License fil
HI,
> Would you be willing to change to a +1 if I told you I pointed this out to
> them on the dev vote
I’ll think about it but probably not as it's IMO a serious issue, but others
IPMC members (including their mentors) can vote +1 if they think that's OK. It
only need 3+1 votes and more +1s
Hi,
> I just checked the code of servicecomb-website, we keep the js and fonts
> into the repo, so we should treat the repo as source release but the source
> has the bundled items (js, and fonts).
AFAICS these are not bundled in the source release (well not for the one put up
to vote on) and I
Hi,
> The NOTICE file you just point is for the servicecomb-website (which is
> build by), not for the other servicecomb sub project.
> As we just publish the website in apache, I'm not sure if the website is
> kind of release. If we treat it as a source release, I guess we don't need to
> mentio
+1
Happy growing!
Best
Best regards,
Pierre Smits
V.P. Apache Trafodion
On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 9:25 PM, Suneel Marthi wrote:
> +1 - its great to see Druid coming to Apache
>
> On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 9:23 PM, Bolke de Bruin wrote:
>
> > +1 (non-binding)
> >
> > > On 26 Feb 2018, at 20:53
Hi Justin,
Would you be willing to change to a +1 if I told you I pointed this out to them
on the dev vote, Steve didn't understand what I meant, but they created a JIRA
to fix it in a following release?
John
On 2018/03/03 03:23:07, Justin Mclean wrote:
> Hi,
>
> -1 (binding) as thereâs B
Hi，
I found the License files (LICENSE-jafama.txt and LICENSE-smile) are both
standate ASLV2, they are the same with LICENSE file. Do we still need to
ship them separately? Can we just using the LICENSE file directly?
Willem Jiang
Blog: http://willemjiang.blogspot.com (English)
http
Hi Justin
I just checked the code of servicecomb-website, we keep the js and fonts
into the repo, so we should treat the repo as source release but the source
has the bundled items (js, and fonts).
I guess the License statements[1] should be fine, please let me know if I
miss anything.
For the NO
Hi Justin,
Thanks for pointing out the NOTICE file issue. I think we messed the usage
of NOTICE and License file. It looks put the License files in the License
directory could be a good way.
The NOTICE file you just point is for the servicecomb-website (which is
build by), not for the other ser
Dear Henk,
The problem should be fixed.
Thank you!
Best,
Oliver
Am 01.03.18 um 16:23 schrieb Henk P. Penning:
Hi PPMC amaya,
Please take a quick look at :
https://checker.apache.org/keys/f779303686e5c596.html
As you can see, incubator/amaya/ has 4 bad signature files ;
Signi
11 matches
Mail list logo
