Re: [Geotools-devel] Contribution Agreement Clarity

On Wed, Jan 30, 2013 at 1:30 AM, Frank Warmerdam wrote: > Folks, > > I have finally got a clear response back from our internal legal > reviewer to my request to offer refinement to the text of the GeoTools > contributor agreement. He indicated that the agreement has multiple > issues, and that i

[Geotools-devel] [Hudson] Hudson build is back to normal : geotools-8.x-nightly #207

See -- This message is automatically generated by Hudson. For more information on Hudson, see: http://hudson-ci.org/ -- Everyone hates slow websites. So d

Re: [Geotools-devel] removing xerces dependency

Thanks, Justin. My patch was not expected to fix the SecondaryNamespaceExceptionTest failure. I recall that SecondaryNamespaceExceptionTest tests that an exception is thrown if secondary namespaces are not defined (null). Once the external xerces 2.7 is removed (in favour of the internal xerces

Re: [Geotools-devel] removing xerces dependency

Hey Ben, So I rebased the xmlnodeps branch against the latest on master and i am still having the same failure with the SecondaryNamespaceExceptionTest. I pushed up newly rebased branches to my repos. https://github.com/jdeolive/geoserver/tree/noxmldeps2 https://github.com/jdeolive/geotools/

Re: [Geotools-devel] Contribution Agreement Clarity

IBM expressed a concern over a *lack* of agreement previously, and over inconstant header files at the time. Both these issues have since been resolved. But it is hard to know, since often open source projects are evaluated for a specific use, and the thought of entering discussion does not occ

Re: [Geotools-devel] Contribution Agreement Clarity

Folks, To be clear we are talking about the contribution agreement, not licences. I believe the apache agreement was suggested but I am sure there are other possibilities if needed. I am curious if any other large organizations have expressed concerns with the current agreement. Best regards, F

Re: [Geotools-devel] Contribution Agreement Clarity

If the Google lawyer(s) could provide a list of some OS licences that are currently in favour for collaborative work, then there would be some context for discussion between the GeoTools PMC and the OSGeo Board. Michael On 30 January 2013 12:26, Jody Garnett wrote: > Thanks for facilitating comm

Re: [Geotools-devel] Contribution Agreement Clarity

Thanks for facilitating communication Frank - even for a disappointing result. Indeed this latest feedback is more harsh than the previous "scope of project not well defined". One of the reasons we have a contribution agreement is to help us reach out to larger organisations such as Google. La

Re: [Geotools-devel] Contribution Agreement Clarity

Folks, I have finally got a clear response back from our internal legal reviewer to my request to offer refinement to the text of the GeoTools contributor agreement. He indicated that the agreement has multiple issues, and that it couldn't be easily corrected to meet our (Google's) expectations.

Re: [Geotools-devel] build infrastructure : different behavior/results than on mac osx and windows

Hey Frank, The server on hudson.opengeo.org is managed by me so i can provide any details you want, just ask. It is currently running ubuntu 10.04. The locale of the user running the hudson server is "en_US.UTF-8". Let me know what else i can help with. -Justin On Tue, Jan 29, 2013 at 2:31 PM,

[Geotools-devel] build infrastructure : different behavior/results than on mac osx and windows

hello developers, I'm pretty confused about different results of deployable artefacts from different build environments at the moment. Whats wrong? Situation: - like the java standard says, properties files should have ISO-8859-1 encodings whereas geoserver (i18n) properties are UTF8 (mentioned i