[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > It's done. Wow. That was quick. Thanks for this!
I now propose to start the graduation vote on Monday, subject to any other complaints in the meantime :-) Regards, Upayavira > Regards > /stephane > On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 02:46:03PM +0100, Upayavira wrote: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>> Actually I have a smarter solution, >>> those libraries are dynamically downloaded in the Console (thanks to >>> OSGi :). >>> So I can remove the tab without problem and make it available from my >>> site as it was before. >>> >>> The only issue is that the tab is not hosted at apache svn. >> Sounds good. Thanks for this. Note, this will need to be done before the >> incubator PMC vote which'll happen in maybe 1 week's time. :-( >> >> Regards, Upayavira >> >> >> >>> /stephane >>> On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 09:28:46AM -0400, Richard S. Hall wrote: >>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >>>>> On Fri, Sep 01, 2006 at 02:20:36PM +0100, Upayavira wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Niclas Hedhman wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Friday 01 September 2006 16:58, santillan wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Just a note: while JMood's initial version was LGPL'd, a software >>>>>>>> grant >>>>>>>> was >>>>>>>> given to the ASF and the JMood code in the trunk is properly ASL'd. >>>>>>>> Moreover, I've removed the dependency to MX4J just in case (as it was >>>>>>>> easy >>>>>>>> to refactor), so currently only depends on osgi.core, osgi.compendium, >>>>>>>> the >>>>>>>> framework and Junit, so no licensing problems here :-) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> Cool. So we are discussing a hypothetical case ;o) >>>>>>> >>>>>> Well, the issue that remains is how we use jfree and jcommon, both of >>>>>> which are, as I understand it, Jmood dependencies, and both are LGPL. >>>>>> >>>>> Not Jmood, but MOSGi dependencies. >>>> Yes, people seemed to have gotten lost. :-) >>>> >>>> Well, the way I see it, if we cannot find compatible graphing libraries, >>>> then we can either remove the component and Stephane can host it >>>> separately (perhaps at Source Forge) or we can create some sort of >>>> bridging and make it optional somehow. Stephane probably knows what >>>> makes the most sense. >>>> >>>> -> richard >
