On May 15, 2012, at 9:11 AM, Forrest Xia wrote: > > > On Mon, May 14, 2012 at 9:34 PM, Kevan Miller <kevan.mil...@gmail.com> wrote: > checksum/signature, build, rat, source, license/notice -- all look fine. > > Here's my +1, but I have a few comments/questions. > > 1. velocity.log need not be in svn. best that we remove… > velocity.log is not in the svn, and I noticed it's in the source zip only, > and think it might be auto-introduced during release process with maven > release plugin. > 2. why does geronimo need a bundle release of bval? any reason why our > requirements have not/cannot be pushed into BVAL? > Geronimo needs some integration code in ValidationParser.java. And the 0.4 > release of bval itself is not a bundle either.
Have we asked the bval community to add the integration code? Could have fooled me… http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/org/apache/bval/org.apache.bval.bundle/0.4/ > 3. why is there a CDDL license and note in the NOTICE file? > I have no idea why there is a CDDL license resource there, anyone else know > the history? 'svn log' or 'svn blame' (or 'svn praise' depending on what kind of mood you're in) are usually a good first step. svn log https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/bundles/tags/bval-jsr303-0.3_1-incubating/src/main/appended-resources/META-INF/NOTICE.vm So, following commit seems to be the culprit http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geronimo-scm/201108.mbox/%3c20110825040758.424f82388...@eris.apache.org%3E I assume the basic framework was copied from the jstl bundle. The NOTICE is wrong. More importantly, it does not include the BVAL NOTICE. So, we are not complying with the AL. This changes things and needs to be fixed, IMO. Here's my -1. --kevan
