Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
David H. DeWolf wrpte:
Everything is already mirrored, we should only need to update for the
future. My understanding is that we can't modify releases that have
already been published - and frankly, I REALLY don't want to go down
that path.
Yepp, I think we should push a new release out as soon as possible.
Should we forgo announcing and updating the Pluto website for the 1.1.2
release? Obviously the damage is done with the distros and artifacts
already published to the mirrors, but no need to exacerbate the situation.
I think we should just wait until the corrected 1.1.3 release is out and
then make the announcements.
Elliot
Carsten
Elliot Metsger wrote:
So I got pinged again by the repository folks, this time Daniel Kulp.
None of our maven artifacts have a LICENSE or NOTICE file in them, and
apparently this is also required per
http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html:
Does the policy apply to binary/object files, such as executables or
JAR files?
Yes. Even if there are no source files within the release, the
LICENSE file and NOTICE file are still both required within every ASF
distribution -- whether the unit of distribution is a .jar, .msi,
.tar/.?gz, .zip, .exe installer, or any other file format used for
distributions. For example, Windows .exe files must not be used as a
unit of distribution unless they are installers and include the
LICENSE and NOTICE files in their installation.
This is in Jira as PLUTO-349.
I'm not sure where this leaves us with our existing releases.
Elliot
