It has been mentioned on other lists that there is concern that those
contributing through GitHub may not know that they are contributing to
the project, and that the contributed code will be licensed under AL2.0.
The vast majority of projects on GitHub don't have a license at all, so
that does
On 05/27/2013 11:15 AM, Thiago H de Paula Figueiredo wrote:
On Mon, 27 May 2013 12:01:11 -0300, Lenny Primak
wrote:
Same here. Big -1 for dropping older IE support. +1 for jq2 if we can
keep older IE.support.
Are there API differences between jQuery 1.9 and 2? If not, I think 1.9
for IE8- an
From all of my dealings with licensing, your interpretation is correct.
If Tapestry depended on Hibernate to function, then there would be a
problem. However, it truly is optional. If it weren't optional, you
would have to provide a license compatible option out of the gate, with
the ability fo
On 07/09/2012 11:57 AM, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
Interesting.
So, perhaps we should modify the Gradle build to package each module's
LICENSE.txt and NOTICE.txt files inside each JAR, say inside the
META-INF folder?
Yes, that would be best. The Maven builds (using the Apache parent at
least)
On 07/09/2012 10:39 AM, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
Serious enough to cancel the vote?
http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
I would say so.
From the page Uli linked to:
http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
Does the policy apply to binary/object files, such as exec
On 11/23/2011 08:41 AM, Massimo Lusetti wrote:
Does anyone is following the discussion at infra@ about git?
It seems they're "looking for" TLP willing to switch to git ... does
we want to be part of this?
Cheers
I've been following it. At this point I don't know that they're looking
for more
