On 2/10/07, Yoav Shapira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...How about we do away with the double negatives and say "The code base
must contain only ASL and ASL-compatible licensed dependencies." ?...
Sure, it's much better!
-Bertrand
---
+1 indeed.. I found more typos on the page, so I'll fix this one too :)
Mvgr,
Martin
robert burrell donkin wrote:
> On 2/10/07, Yoav Shapira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On 2/10/07, Bertrand Delacretaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > On 2/10/07, Martin van den Bemt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
On 2/10/07, Yoav Shapira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 2/10/07, Bertrand Delacretaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 2/10/07, Martin van den Bemt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > ...No non ASL or ASL compatbile dependencies in the code base..
>
> You're right, I have replaced the phrase with "No n
On 2/10/07, Bertrand Delacretaz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 2/10/07, Martin van den Bemt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> ...No non ASL or ASL compatbile dependencies in the code base..
You're right, I have replaced the phrase with "No non ASL or non ASL
compatible dependencies in the code base".
On 2/10/07, Martin van den Bemt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
...No non ASL or ASL compatbile dependencies in the code base..
You're right, I have replaced the phrase with "No non ASL or non ASL
compatible dependencies in the code base".
-Bertrand
---
Hi everyone,
On the
http://incubator.apache.org/incubation/Incubation_Policy.html#Exiting+the+Incubator
page
there is a Legal item with the content of :
No non ASL or ASL compatbile dependencies in the code base
Which kind of reads weird to me, it would probably read better as
No non ASL or *
