Yes! We're OK to release M1. We should definitely make sure we run RAT. Alex
---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Feb 15, 2008 6:36 PM Subject: Re: Cliff's page on 3rd party policy To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Feb 15, 2008 6:13 PM, Alex Karasulu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ok great - if there are no objections I'm going to forward this to a project > mailing list. You are welcome to do so. > Thanks, > Alex > > On Feb 15, 2008 5:31 PM, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Feb 15, 2008 5:26 PM, Alex Karasulu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > > I was just looking at this page because folks on different PMCs have > cited > > > it as official ASF policy around 3rd party licensing: > > > > > > > > > http://people.apache.org/~cliffs/3party.html<http://people.apache.org/%7Ecliffs/3party.html> > > > > > > I thought this work or some subset of it was what the board is currently > > > reviewing to determine our official policy. Hence all the mega threads > > > around it. > > > > Here is a (minor) update: > > > > http://people.apache.org/~rubys/3party.html<http://people.apache.org/%7Erubys/3party.html> > > > > > Am I wrong? Is this page our official policy right now? > > > > No, it isn't official just yet. > > > > > > > Also if a project is preparing for a release and there's a transient > > > dependency on an MPL licensed binary, then does the board recommend we > wait > > > until the policy is solidified before the next board meeting? > > > > Don't wait. > > > > - Sam Ruby
