Re: [PROPOSAL] The future of Jakarta
On 5/26/07, Henri Yandell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ack in terms of driving a community away because it is unable to meet our arbitrary criteria. That sort of thinking just seems so Borg to me. It's another way of saying that a software product only has value if its hosted by the ASF. If a subproject, or even a project, is down to one or two committers, and those committers can't find a third, and don't want to apply to the Commons or declare the product dormant, then setting up shop on GoogleCode is an excellent alternative. I've done the same myself, and it's not the least bit painful. In many ways, it's joyful. It might even be healthy if more ASF committers were involved with other hosts. The ASF may be a cult, but it should not also be a fetish :) -Ted. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Release JCS 1.3
sebb wrote: I find the current NOTICE rather misleading - it looks as though the whole of JCS is licensed under a Xerox licence. I think it's therefore important to fix this. From re-reading the NOTICE file, I agree with you. My proposal to solve this is the following: ---8--- Apache Jakarta JCS Copyright 2001-2007 The Apache Software Foundation. Portions Copyright (c) Xerox Corporation 1998-2001. This product includes software developed at The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/). This product includes software developed at Xerox Corporation which has been published under the following license: --- Copyright (c) Xerox Corporation 1998-2001. All rights reserved. Use and copying of this software and preparation of derivative works based upon this software are permitted. Any distribution of this software or derivative works must comply with all applicable United States export control laws. This software is made available AS IS, and Xerox Corporation makes no warranty about the software, its performance or its conformity to any specification. --- ---8--- Could we agree on this version? Bye, Thomas. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Release JCS 1.3
On 30/05/07, Thomas Vandahl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: sebb wrote: I find the current NOTICE rather misleading - it looks as though the whole of JCS is licensed under a Xerox licence. I think it's therefore important to fix this. From re-reading the NOTICE file, I agree with you. My proposal to solve this is the following: ---8--- Apache Jakarta JCS Copyright 2001-2007 The Apache Software Foundation. Portions Copyright (c) Xerox Corporation 1998-2001. This product includes software developed at The Apache Software Foundation (http://www.apache.org/). This product includes software developed at Xerox Corporation which has been published under the following license: --- Copyright (c) Xerox Corporation 1998-2001. All rights reserved. Use and copying of this software and preparation of derivative works based upon this software are permitted. Any distribution of this software or derivative works must comply with all applicable United States export control laws. This software is made available AS IS, and Xerox Corporation makes no warranty about the software, its performance or its conformity to any specification. --- ---8--- Could we agree on this version? The NOTICE file is not supposed to contain any licenses. I suggest you remove the Xerox license header from it, and add it to the LICENSE file, with the appropriate introduction. Sorry to keep going on about this, but there's only one other file to edit. Bye, Thomas. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Release JCS 1.3
sebb wrote: The NOTICE file is not supposed to contain any licenses. I beg to differ, but I will not go into this again. I suggest you remove the Xerox license header from it, and add it to the LICENSE file, with the appropriate introduction. The LICENSE.txt file is supposed to contain the ASL 2.0 and nothing else. I created another file LICENSE.xerox and refer to it from the NOTICE file. Sorry to keep going on about this, but there's only one other file to edit. Actually, it's more than that. But so be it. I will update the files on my site and kindly ask for a re-vote. Bye, Thomas. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Release JCS 1.3
On 30/05/07, Thomas Vandahl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: sebb wrote: The NOTICE file is not supposed to contain any licenses. I beg to differ, but I will not go into this again. I suggest you remove the Xerox license header from it, and add it to the LICENSE file, with the appropriate introduction. The LICENSE.txt file is supposed to contain the ASL 2.0 and nothing else. I don't think that is correct. The reference to copying the AL 2.0 file to the LICENSE file in http://apache.org/dev/apply-license.html#new relates to creating the initial LICENSE file - it does not say that the LICENSE file cannot contain anything else. I created another file LICENSE.xerox and refer to it from the NOTICE file. It needs either to be referenced in or actually in the LICENSE file. Sorry to keep going on about this, but there's only one other file to edit. Actually, it's more than that. Not necessarily. It's your choice as to whether to append the Xerox license to the LICENSE file or put it in a separate file and edit LICENSE to refer to it. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
jakarta-watchdog-4.0 source download
i understand this project is dormant. i would still like to download the source. i can not seem to locate a download location. if anyone can give me a pointer that would be very helpful. thank you. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Release JCS 1.3
On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 19:00 +0100, sebb wrote: The NOTICE file is not supposed to contain any licenses. What makes you think so? I am still a bit stumped that you so strongly insist on this. Is there any reference (besides the cited httpd project) to that? Best regards Henning -- Henning P. Schmiedehausen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] | J2EE, Linux, |gls 91054 Buckenhof, Germany -- +49 9131 506540 | Apache person |eau Open Source Consulting, Development, Design| Velocity - Turbine guy |rwc |m k INTERMETA - Gesellschaft fuer Mehrwertdienste mbH - RG Fuerth, HRB 7350 |a s Sitz der Gesellschaft: Buckenhof. Geschaeftsfuehrer: Henning Schmiedehausen |n - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Release JCS 1.3
On 5/30/07, Henning Schmiedehausen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 19:00 +0100, sebb wrote: The NOTICE file is not supposed to contain any licenses. What makes you think so? I am still a bit stumped that you so strongly insist on this. Is there any reference (besides the cited httpd project) to that? For a long time I thought LICENSE was for the license only and everything else went in NOTICE. Discussions with Cliff, and I'm pretty sure watching other discussions on legal-discuss, made it clear that license-things go in LICENSE, and copyright/ip things go in NOTICE. Look at the two places in http://people.apache.org/~cliffs/3party.html where it mentions LICENSE, both imply that the LICENSE file is the only place to find licensing terms. Hen - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: jakarta-watchdog-4.0 source download
Surprisingly hard to find. Watchdog has technically moved to tomcat.apache.org, but as it was dormant before then there's not been a lot done but move the svn over there. ie) Jakarta still has the 'it's dormant' bit, but as it moved the download page was removed. Looking in http://archive.apache.org/dist/jakarta/ , I'm not even sure where the Watchdog downloads would be (assuming there were releases). So next step... to look at the svn history of the downloads part of the site to see where it used to point. Will do that in a bit - need to drive to work first. Hen On 5/30/07, Peter J Allenbach [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i understand this project is dormant. i would still like to download the source. i can not seem to locate a download location. if anyone can give me a pointer that would be very helpful. thank you. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: jakarta-watchdog-4.0 source download
On 5/30/07, Peter J Allenbach [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: i understand this project is dormant. i would still like to download the source. i can not seem to locate a download location. if anyone can give me a pointer that would be very helpful. snip/ You could go to the repository: http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/watchdog/ Not sure which branch and revision or tag, here's a candidate (there are others): http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/watchdog/branches/other/tc4.x/watchdog4-2001/ -Rahul thank you. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Release JCS 1.3
Yep, I know this. Status Version: 0.52 Effective Date. N/A (proposed) == non binding. If it were in effect, then yes, the paragraph --- cut --- * Reciprocity Required by some Components: Some included third-party works are licensed under terms that require distribution of derivative works to be made available under the same license as the original work. See the Apache product's LICENSE file to find the applicable third-party licenses. --- cut --- would make it clear. But it is no official Apache policy. And in lieu of policy, none of us can say that the way Thomas compiled LICENSE and NOTICE is wrong. Because there is no official policy. *Sigh*, it seems that I finally have to subscribe to legal-discuss. :-( Best regards Henning On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 12:35 -0700, Henri Yandell wrote: On 5/30/07, Henning Schmiedehausen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 2007-05-30 at 19:00 +0100, sebb wrote: The NOTICE file is not supposed to contain any licenses. What makes you think so? I am still a bit stumped that you so strongly insist on this. Is there any reference (besides the cited httpd project) to that? For a long time I thought LICENSE was for the license only and everything else went in NOTICE. Discussions with Cliff, and I'm pretty sure watching other discussions on legal-discuss, made it clear that license-things go in LICENSE, and copyright/ip things go in NOTICE. Look at the two places in http://people.apache.org/~cliffs/3party.html where it mentions LICENSE, both imply that the LICENSE file is the only place to find licensing terms. Hen -- Henning P. Schmiedehausen -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] | J2EE, Linux, |gls 91054 Buckenhof, Germany -- +49 9131 506540 | Apache person |eau Open Source Consulting, Development, Design| Velocity - Turbine guy |rwc |m k INTERMETA - Gesellschaft fuer Mehrwertdienste mbH - RG Fuerth, HRB 7350 |a s Sitz der Gesellschaft: Buckenhof. Geschaeftsfuehrer: Henning Schmiedehausen |n - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [VOTE] Release JCS 1.3
On 30/05/07, Henning Schmiedehausen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yep, I know this. Status Version: 0.52 Effective Date. N/A (proposed) == non binding. However: http://apache.org/dev/apply-license.html says much the same, and seems to be policy. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Announce: RAT 0.5
Hi, for those who are interested: A new version 0.5 of the Release Audit Tool is available from http://code.google.com/p/arat/ Compared to the previous version 0.4.1, the following changes have been made: * Added header matcher for DoJo. * Refactoring existing codebase to separate concerns and use resource pipeline. * New header matching library. Jochen -- Women have the ability to wind you round their little finger. Daughters can use all of the fingers together. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
