Hmmm... seems that - even though we've *repeated* this multiple times,
we have to state this again. Contents of http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
are *development* tarballs and not for any distribution.
None of our many other distributors seem to have problems with this
concept, I hope
This is a big booom for me and some fellow webmasters. And is disappointing
me, special the style you are using. This style gives me the impression that
ASF is not happy with Apache Lounge. Even I tried to promote Apache in the
Windows world.
I close the site now to further notice, till we sort
Steffen wrote:
This is a big booom for me and some fellow webmasters. And is disappointing
me, special the style you are using. This style gives me the impression that
ASF is not happy with Apache Lounge. Even I tried to promote Apache in the
Windows world.
I think what you've done for
Thanks for the answer.
I shall keep the site down, I am very disappointed and I feel threatened by
you for legal stuff.
Steffen
- Original Message -
From: William A. Rowe, Jr. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: dev@httpd.apache.org
Sent: Sunday, 19 August, 2007 01:31
Subject: Re: Apachelounge
Steffen,
I really don't see anything threatening by what Bill said. On the
contrary, he very openly said that there's nothing illegal about
releasing an RC; the way I read it, the potential problems are coming
from endusers who might use a broken RC, fsck up their systems and go
hunting (with a
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
doesn't belong on any external site. Since it's not an ASF release,
*you* are absorbing all the liability and risk that any released ASF
package would carry. It's an apachelounge release, so you would
personally answer to any IP issues. Not smart.
Issac
Tom Donovan wrote:
Maybe not threatening - but it is an eye-opener for some of us that the
Apache2 license protects released versions of Apache differently.
First, I hope I was not threatening. As I said, my appologies if it came
across that way, I'm not feeling up to par. That said, IANAL
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Hmmm... seems that - even though we've *repeated* this multiple times,
we have to state this again. Contents of http://httpd.apache.org/dev/dist/
are *development* tarballs and not for any distribution.
Just out of curiosity, why don't we name the tarballs as such?
