Thanks! On Oct 7, 2013, at 18:14 , Noah Slater <[email protected]> wrote:
> Nice, thanks. Reviewed. Add a trailing newline to src/Makefile.am, and this > looks good to merge in. > > > On 7 October 2013 17:41, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Excellent, thanks! >> >> I did the following things: >> >> - use Apache 2 License for my-first-couchdb-plugin >> >> - use EXTRA_DIST in src/Makefile.am for my-first-couchdb-plugin >> >> - removed src/my-first-couchdb-plugin/Makefile from configure.ac >> >> - kept `^src/couchjs-node/Makefile` & `^src/couchjs-node/Makefile.in` >> in license.skip as we do that with all the other ones as well, >> as `^Makefile` does not match `path/to/Makefile`. >> >> Ran a full make distcheck to my satisfaction. The resulting tarball >> includes all the files we care about. >> >> Compare view here: >> >> >> https://github.com/janl/couchdb/compare/apache:master...build-system-fixes-1.5.x >> (See Oct. 7 entries for today’s edits) >> >> Best >> Jan >> -- >> >> >> On Oct 7, 2013, at 17:07 , Noah Slater <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On 7 October 2013 17:00, Jan Lehnardt <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>> In this case, I would put the EXTRA_DIST in src/Makefile.am, and remove >>>> the >>>>> Makefile.am from src/my-first-couchdb-plugin. The EXTRA_DIST will >>>> obviously >>>>> have to prefix all the filenames with my-first-couchdb-plugin, but >> that's >>>>> fine. And you can call your Makefile whatever you want. >>>>> >>>>> The instructions will need to be updated so that people are instructed >> to >>>>> sprinkle the magic dust on configure.ac, when they want their >>>> Makefile.am >>>>> to be picked up by the build system >>>> >>>> I tried that, but it failed with “no target for…” and then the first >> item >>>> in EXTRA_DIST but I might have done something wrong, I’ll try this again >>>> later. Thanks for confirming that it should work :) >>> >>> >>> Okay. Let me know if you get stuck. Or when you have a final working >> config >>> to review. >>> >>> >>>> I wanted to avoid setting people one way or another when choosing a >>>> license, >>>> because they are free to create non-Apache-2 licensed plugins, but I am >>>> equally happy to just set a precedent. >>>> >>> >>> The Apache License 2 is a good license choice (it's permissive like MIT >> or >>> BSD but includes patent protections) and sane defaults are always a nice >>> thing. (It also makes it easier for us to ship the demo code.) >>> >>> Everything else looks fine. >>> >>> Thanks. >>> >>> -- >>> Noah Slater >>> https://twitter.com/nslater >> >> > > > -- > Noah Slater > https://twitter.com/nslater
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
