Le 7/16/13 1:14 AM, sebb a écrit :
Have you seen this?
http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice
It suggests that additions to NOTICE should be quite rare.
The NOTICE files just contain the Apache License reference as of today.
The one used for binary contains a ref rto SLF4J
Le 7/16/13 1:32 AM, sebb a écrit :
I think it's fundamental that VOTE emails contain the following
information, as well as the links to the archives/jars:
SVN tag + the revision number
==
Totally +1
Link to KEYS file
I know it will always be the same,
Le 7/16/13 2:34 AM, sebb a écrit :
On 29 June 2013 21:41, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 6/29/13 7:35 PM, Julien Vermillard a écrit :
I think having the codec module java 6 compatible would help to use it
with MINA2 or other framework.
WDYT ?
I don't mind if it's JAVA 6
Le 7/16/13 2:41 AM, sebb a écrit :
On 21 May 2013 10:02, Steve Ulrich steve.ulr...@proemion.com wrote:
2 Reasons for 7.0:
1) When MINA 3 is released, Java 8 is near or already released
2) Developers who don't want to upgrade to Java 7 because of the (testing,
developing, whatever) effort
Le 7/16/13 3:02 AM, sebb a écrit :
On 20 May 2013 10:06, Julien Vermillard jvermill...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
comments inline
On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 10:59 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com
wrote:
Le 5/19/13 11:18 PM, Raphaël Barazzutti a écrit :
I'm currently working fixing some
sebb [mailto:seb...@gmail.com] wrote:
On 21 May 2013 10:02, Steve Ulrich steve.ulr...@proemion.com wrote:
2 Reasons for 7.0:
1) When MINA 3 is released, Java 8 is near or already released
2) Developers who don't want to upgrade to Java 7 because of the
(testing, developing, whatever)
Le 7/16/13 10:34 AM, Steve Ulrich a écrit :
sebb [mailto:seb...@gmail.com] wrote:
On 21 May 2013 10:02, Steve Ulrich steve.ulr...@proemion.com wrote:
2 Reasons for 7.0:
1) When MINA 3 is released, Java 8 is near or already released
2) Developers who don't want to upgrade to Java 7 because of
On 16 July 2013 08:59, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 7/16/13 1:32 AM, sebb a écrit :
I think it's fundamental that VOTE emails contain the following
information, as well as the links to the archives/jars:
SVN tag + the revision number
==
Totally +1
On 16 July 2013 08:41, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 7/16/13 1:14 AM, sebb a écrit :
Have you seen this?
http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice
It suggests that additions to NOTICE should be quite rare.
The NOTICE files just contain the Apache License
On 16 July 2013 09:12, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 7/16/13 2:41 AM, sebb a écrit :
On 21 May 2013 10:02, Steve Ulrich steve.ulr...@proemion.com wrote:
2 Reasons for 7.0:
1) When MINA 3 is released, Java 8 is near or already released
2) Developers who don't want to upgrade
Le 7/16/13 11:48 AM, sebb a écrit :
On 16 July 2013 08:59, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
I suggest we create a template file and store it into the root of MINA.
Belongs with developer info, e.g.
http://mina.apache.org/mina-project/developper-guide.html
I disagree. Having to
Le 7/16/13 12:08 PM, sebb a écrit :
On 16 July 2013 08:41, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 7/16/13 1:14 AM, sebb a écrit :
Have you seen this?
http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice
It suggests that additions to NOTICE should be quite rare.
The NOTICE
Le 7/16/13 12:10 PM, sebb a écrit :
I don't think that's generally true.
If MINA is part of a larger system, then updating Java as well as MINA
is a lot more work and testing than just updating MINA.
Especially if the system is installed on multiple nodes which may have
different hardware
I guys,
I fixed the Notice and LICENSE files so that we (hopefully) are on line
with The ASF rules.
- First of all, I renamed the files to NOTICE and LICENCE (removing the
.txt)
- The Notice file does not contain anything but a reference to The ASF.
There is no required notice in any component
Le 7/16/13 5:51 PM, Jeff MAURY a écrit :
Found the following string Copyright [] [name of copyright owner] in
the LICENSE files.
Yes, this is plain normal.
The end of the AL 2.0 license contains some template for people who
would like to embed our packages in their own distribution :
On 16 July 2013 14:01, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 7/16/13 12:08 PM, sebb a écrit :
On 16 July 2013 08:41, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 7/16/13 1:14 AM, sebb a écrit :
Have you seen this?
http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#mod-notice
It
On 16 July 2013 13:31, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 7/16/13 11:48 AM, sebb a écrit :
On 16 July 2013 08:59, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
I suggest we create a template file and store it into the root of MINA.
Belongs with developer info, e.g.
On 16 July 2013 14:07, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 7/16/13 12:10 PM, sebb a écrit :
I don't think that's generally true.
If MINA is part of a larger system, then updating Java as well as MINA
is a lot more work and testing than just updating MINA.
Especially if the
Le 7/16/13 6:48 PM, sebb a écrit :
It is important that the NL files relate to the bits which are
actually included.
This means that the NL files at the top level of SVN can be used
directly for the source archive, as the archive and SVN should
generally agree (bar maybe the DOAP).
The
Le 7/16/13 6:51 PM, sebb a écrit :
On 16 July 2013 13:31, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 7/16/13 11:48 AM, sebb a écrit :
On 16 July 2013 08:59, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
I suggest we create a template file and store it into the root of MINA.
Belongs with
Le 7/16/13 6:57 PM, sebb a écrit :
In other words, Time is of the essence
Well yes, but that has little to do with whether to move to Java 6 or Java 7.
In our case, it does. We aren't enough and we have not a lot of work
time to dedicate to support for older versions of java for all the MINA
Hi !
After some NOTICE and LICENSE file fixes (thanks Emmanuel!)
Here the first milestone release for MINA 3.
A temporary tag has been created (it can be removed if the vote is not
approved):
GIT tag : 3.0.0-M1 SHA-1 : ae50b809006efcd99fd68a9ba2be713c7d917756
Please take a look at the artifact
On 16 July 2013 19:59, Julien Vermillard jvermill...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi !
After some NOTICE and LICENSE file fixes (thanks Emmanuel!)
Here the first milestone release for MINA 3.
A temporary tag has been created (it can be removed if the vote is not
approved):
GIT tag : 3.0.0-M1 SHA-1 :
On 16 July 2013 18:39, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 7/16/13 6:51 PM, sebb a écrit :
On 16 July 2013 13:31, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 7/16/13 11:48 AM, sebb a écrit :
On 16 July 2013 08:59, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
I suggest we
On 16 July 2013 18:34, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 7/16/13 6:48 PM, sebb a écrit :
It is important that the NL files relate to the bits which are
actually included.
This means that the NL files at the top level of SVN can be used
directly for the source archive, as the
Le 7/16/13 11:18 PM, sebb a écrit :
On 16 July 2013 19:59, Julien Vermillard jvermill...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi !
After some NOTICE and LICENSE file fixes (thanks Emmanuel!)
Here the first milestone release for MINA 3.
A temporary tag has been created (it can be removed if the vote is not
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 11:18 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 16 July 2013 19:59, Julien Vermillard jvermill...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi !
After some NOTICE and LICENSE file fixes (thanks Emmanuel!)
Here the first milestone release for MINA 3.
A temporary tag has been created (it can be
Le 7/16/13 8:59 PM, Julien Vermillard a écrit :
Hi !
After some NOTICE and LICENSE file fixes (thanks Emmanuel!)
Here the first milestone release for MINA 3.
A temporary tag has been created (it can be removed if the vote is not
approved):
GIT tag : 3.0.0-M1 SHA-1 :
On 16 July 2013 23:09, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
Le 7/16/13 11:34 PM, sebb a écrit :
On 16 July 2013 18:34, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
The NL files only depend on what is in the archives.
It's just a question of checking that everything that is included in
On 16 July 2013 23:18, Julien Vermillard jvermill...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Jul 16, 2013 at 11:18 PM, sebb seb...@gmail.com wrote:
On 16 July 2013 19:59, Julien Vermillard jvermill...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi !
After some NOTICE and LICENSE file fixes (thanks Emmanuel!)
Here the first milestone
Thanks for the report; sorry for the delay in fixing it.
Should be OK now.
On 10 June 2013 12:30, elliot ell...@edesix.com wrote:
In the example found on this page:
http://mina.apache.org/sshd-project/embedding_ssh.html
There is a missing round bracket in the example code for setting up the
31 matches
Mail list logo
