Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
On 6/20/08, Stefano Bagnara <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Let me change my example: how it is defined that "the NOTICE file
distributed with this work" is one very file between the hundreds of
NOTICE files being in our svn?
From "distributed with" to "in the first parent folder of the
distribution" there is creativity...
Because it's clearly marked NOTICE
I meant we have hundreds of files clearly marked NOTICE in our svn
repository. They all are named NOTICE.. the only thing that link each
NOTICE to each other random file is some folder relationship.
I understand you say the right NOTICE is the first one you find if you
go up in the folder structure from the file you are interested in... but
this is not written anywhere... so that's why I don't think this "NOTICE
file in SVN" solve any issue.
But here we also go with the definition of source release (you say it is
an svn export I instead have no problem with programmatically packaged
source releases) we already discussed this issue in past, no need to
rehash it.
The more I discuss the more I see there are much less policies I thought
ASF had in place. Most of what I thought were a ASF policies are instead
still being discussed and there is still no consensus in Legal Affairs.
I'll keep reading.. now I have some more tool to understand who I should
care to talk to and who to blame ;-)
Apache traditionally prefers social convention to formal policy. But
IMHO Apache is now too large to act as a tribal unit and needs to move
to a more formal structure.
++++1 I agree :-)
Stefano
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
