Hmm I think notice file needs to include jquery refs, yes?
If so that's probably cause to re-rool an rc.
Scott
On Dec 17, 2011, at 2:25 AM, Ivan Habunek
wrote:
On 17 December 2011 10:45, Christian Grobmeier
wrote:
Whats meant is the LICENSE file needs to contain the MIT/GPL license:
+1
On Dec 17, 2011, at 4:36 AM, Christian Grobmeier
wrote:
OK looks good to me: +1
Thanks!
On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 12:08 PM, Ivan Habunek
wrote:
Dear all,
It is my pleasure to announce the second release candidate for Apache
log4php version 2.2.0.
Changes since RC1 are:
* Updated
OK looks good to me: +1
Thanks!
On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 12:08 PM, Ivan Habunek wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> It is my pleasure to announce the second release candidate for Apache
> log4php version 2.2.0.
>
> Changes since RC1 are:
> * Updated LICENSE file to include jQuery license
> * Fixed dates in
Am 17.12.2011 12:09, schrieb Ivan Habunek:
To start things off, here's my +1.
Best regards,
Ivan
On 17 December 2011 12:08, Ivan Habunek wrote:
Dear all,
It is my pleasure to announce the second release candidate for Apache
log4php version 2.2.0.
Changes since RC1 are:
* Updated LICENSE f
To start things off, here's my +1.
Best regards,
Ivan
On 17 December 2011 12:08, Ivan Habunek wrote:
> Dear all,
>
> It is my pleasure to announce the second release candidate for Apache
> log4php version 2.2.0.
>
> Changes since RC1 are:
> * Updated LICENSE file to include jQuery license
> *
Dear all,
It is my pleasure to announce the second release candidate for Apache
log4php version 2.2.0.
Changes since RC1 are:
* Updated LICENSE file to include jQuery license
* Fixed dates in NOTICE file
* Added license headers to minified js and css files
* Added (tm) to project name in
On 17 December 2011 10:45, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> Whats meant is the LICENSE file needs to contain the MIT/GPL license:
> http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#distributing-code-under-several-licenses
>
> I think the LICENSE must containt the license of jquery and probably
> even in the NOT
On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 10:33 AM, Ivan Habunek wrote:
> Hi Scott,
>
> On 17 December 2011 09:41, Scott Deboy wrote:
>> Do we care about the jquery license for the site? If so, we need something
>> in the notice file...otherwise, I guess we're ok...from the rat report:
>>
>> 4 Unknown Licenses
>>
Hi Christian,
On 17 December 2011 08:20, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> +1
>
> Checked the site (AMAZING work, thanks!!), the sigs, checksums etc.
>
> - we should update the NOTICE file with the next release, because
> copyright is 2004 - 2011, not 2010
> - on the the site top left in the branding
Hi Scott,
On 17 December 2011 09:41, Scott Deboy wrote:
> Do we care about the jquery license for the site? If so, we need something
> in the notice file...otherwise, I guess we're ok...from the rat report:
>
> 4 Unknown Licenses
>
> ***
>
> Unapproved licenses:
>
>
Oh dear... good catch.
As the site is part of the delivery, I think we need to include it :-(
Cheers
Christian
On Sat, Dec 17, 2011 at 9:41 AM, Scott Deboy wrote:
>
> Do we care about the jquery license for the site? If so, we need something
> in the notice file...otherwise, I guess we're ok...
Do we care about the jquery license for the site? If so, we need something
in the notice file...otherwise, I guess we're ok...from the rat report:
4 Unknown Licenses
***
Unapproved licenses:
src/site/resources/js/jquery.min.js
src/site/resources/js/jquery.js
s
12 matches
Mail list logo
