Jean must have TinyURL as a bookmarklet :-) I just looked at the RAT report referenced in [1] and would like to note a few things. The XML files are generated by Cayenne Modeler and should not have the license headers. (If Cayenne Modeler automatically added the license, anyone who created a model in Cayenne would have the Apache License in their potentially proprietary models, which they would not like). The DTD and CSS could certainly have the license added as comments. I'm a little torn on Artist.java, though. It was initially generated by Cayenne Modeler, but can be customized by the end-user (will not be overwritten). In this case, Artist.java does have a little bit of custom code added to it. In the same directory is also Gallery.java and Painting.java, which also do not have the license added, but are just shell classes (no methods). We can add the license to these files (but not to the superclasses), but I don't know if that is a best Apache practice since the file looks different than what the modeler would generate (might be slightly confusing to someone learning Cayenne and looking at the tutorials).
Thoughts? Thanks, /dev/mrg On 11/15/06, Jean T. Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Craig L Russell wrote: ... > I'd suggest you make sure to include a pointer to your release as a > proof point that you're really ready to graduate. And it will help to > run Robert's RAT detector on the release if you haven't already done. Robert himself ran RAT [1] :-) Does anyone spot anything in the status file [2] that needs to be updated? -jean [1] http://tinyurl.com/y8gwgv [2] http://incubator.apache.org/projects/cayenne.html
