On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 7:43 PM Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> wrote:

> +1 it's not incorrect. Please read the BSD3c license
>
> > 1. Redistributions of source code must retain the above copyright
> >    notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer.
> >
> > 2. Redistributions in binary form must reproduce the above copyright
> >    notice, this list of conditions and the following disclaimer in the
> >   documentation and/or other materials provided with the distribution.
>
> It needs noticing. That's why we put it into NOTICE ;)
>
> +1 from me.
>
>
Sorry but you're incorrect.  The copyright claim is already present by
copying in their license file.


>
> LieGrue,
> strub
>
>
> > Am 14.03.2018 um 19:00 schrieb Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com
> >:
> >
> >
> >
> > Le 14 mars 2018 18:51, "John D. Ament" <johndam...@apache.org> a écrit :
> > ASF policy is that NOTICE files are present when the consumed product
> includes a NOTICE file.  In BSD-3-Clause products, the copyright statement
> (including download link) is in the license file.  So its enough to list it
> there.
> >
> > My vote: -1 due to incorrect NOTICE file.
> >
> > It is not incorrect since the license is particular it must be in notice
> to be able to put all parts together on user side. If you dont you let
> users do again this job which is insanely bad.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 1:46 PM Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Le 14 mars 2018 18:30, "John D. Ament" <johndam...@apache.org> a écrit :
> > Why does the NOTICE file in the resulting JAR (for the ASM shaded
> dependency) include
> >
> > This product includes software developed at
> > OW2 Consortium (http://asm.ow2.org/)
> >
> > There is no notice file associated with ASM 6.1, so we should not need
> to declare any notice.
> >
> > Well it is not an asf licensed software nor an asf project so it is no
> bad IMHO to list it here. Also their website look a bit outdated so I was
> not sure it was that ok to completely drop it.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Mar 14, 2018 at 12:54 PM Romain Manni-Bucau <
> rmannibu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > yep, as written ;)
> >
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
> >
> > 2018-03-14 17:51 GMT+01:00 Jean-Louis MONTEIRO <jeano...@gmail.com>:
> > Romain,
> >
> > as far as I have seen, there is only the ASM upgrade, right?
> >
> > Le mer. 14 mars 2018 à 17:49, Romain Manni-Bucau <rmannibu...@gmail.com>
> a écrit :
> > Hi!
> >
> > Please VOTE for the release of Apache XBean-4.7.
> >
> > Here is the staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1049
> > The source distribution can be found here:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-1049/org/apache/xbean/xbean/4.7/xbean-4.7-source-release.zip
> > sha1 is ea25f3fda5d9abea891a62abf738d1024f289dd5
> >
> > Change is only about upgrade asm to 6.1 (java 10).
> >
> > [+1] ship it
> > [+0] meh, don’t care
> > [-1] nope, stop because ${reason}
> >
> > The VOTE is open for 72h.
> >
> > Here is my +1.
> >
> >
> > Romain Manni-Bucau
> > @rmannibucau |  Blog | Old Blog | Github | LinkedIn | Book
> >
> >
> >
>
>

Reply via email to