On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 3:02 PM, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> wrote: > > That's right. If you, Rob Muir, just so happen to set up a github > project with a fix to Xerces, and I, Benson Margulies, just happen to > help you publish it to Maven Central, then the PMC, without (much) > fear of hassle, can consume it as a binary dependency. But some folks > will want to be sure that we have drawn a bright line between this > process and the formal activities of the PMC. >
They may want that: but that doesn't mean they will get it. Personally I'm pretty frustrated at the insinuation that anything we did for 3.6 is questionable, we spent a shitload of time trying to make sure there was no .jar files in source release, no fake maven releases of other peoples code, no sketchy links to anything on apache infra, or anything like that. Seeing that I (and a bunch of other people) stayed up for many long nighters to clean this crap up, I'm willing to stand up for it: so like I said I have no concerns at all. If anyone in the PMC is concerned with how the dependencies for 3.6 were managed in that release, then speak your mind. But nobody voted against it so I can only hope that you have a minority opinion here. -- lucidimagination.com --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
