2012/2/22 Eric Charles <[email protected]>: > Hi Stefano, > > I don't understand what you mean with the references in the LICENSE/NOTICE. > If you look at jsieve 0.4 release, there are no such references, and to my > understanding it's not the goal of these files to list the jars.
I just noticed we had an issue also in 0.4 release. The main license file for the binary distribution didn't include the licensing information for Oracle's javamail/activation jars that are bundled in the lib folder. I'm in the process of removing oracle dependencies in favor of geronimo ones as jsieve only depends on the API part of the library and they should be equivalent (we did the same in jdkim), so that we only bundle apache licensed libraries and everything is cleaner/easier. Hope to commit it soon. Stefano > Btw, one thing to do is to update the RELEASE_NOTE.txt (one more reason to > cancel). > > Thx, > Eric > > > > On 21/02/12 22:46, Stefano Bagnara wrote: >> >> 2012/2/21 Eric Charles<[email protected]>: >>> >>> Hi Stefano, >>> See comment inside. >>> >>> I will cancel the vote and relaunch a new one after fixing assembly. >>> >>> Thx for your review, Eric >> >> >> Thanks to you for the hard work! Reviewing is easy compared to pushing >> releases! >> >>> On 21/02/12 12:01, Stefano Bagnara wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> (http://apache.fastbull.org/james/apache-jsieve/0.4/apache-james-jsieve-0.4-src.zip) >>>> , so maybe something gone wrong with the latest pom changes or with >>>> the release process. >>> >>> >>> src are available: >>> >>> >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachejames-003/org/apache/james/apache-jsieve-core/0.5/apache-jsieve-core-0.5-sources.jar >>> >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachejames-003/org/apache/james/apache-jsieve-mailet/0.5/apache-jsieve-mailet-0.5-sources.jar >>> >>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachejames-003/org/apache/james/apache-jsieve-util/0.5/apache-jsieve-util-0.5-sources.jar >>> >>> ... but a single tarball with all of them is not... - I had issues with >>> the >>> assemble module, desactivated it for the release, now I fixed it. >> >> >> I'm not sure this is "right", as they are not the full sources of our >> product: they don't include the root stuff (like the website and >> release notes) and they don't include tests. >> >> One thing to check after you fix the assembly is the LICENSE/NOTICE >> for the bin assembly: they have to include references to the jars >> included in the binary tar. >> >> Stefano >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > > -- > eric | http://about.echarles.net | @echarles > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
