On 25 Oct 2011, at 07:53, Tommaso Teofili wrote: > 2011/10/25 Łukasz Moreń <[email protected]> > >> Hi all, >> >> We are still waiting for the IP grant from the university, although I am >> sure it will be sorted out. >> I know it may be annoying, but we can just keep waiting.
If there is any way I can help, let me know (I had to get the grant from Bolton Uni for Wookie). >> >> There is growing interest in Amber development so to not block that, maybe >> we could: >> >> 1. make a new branch from the current trunk (we would have to do that >> anyway) - stable draft-10 implementation. >> 2. continue adding new features to the trunk - there is already few patches >> waiting for commit on jira. >> >> Please let me know what do you think? >> > > a big +1 from me ! > Tommaso +1 ! > > > >> >> Cheers, >> Lukasz Moren >> >> On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Pid <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> On 19/07/2011 07:51, Stefan Seelmann wrote: >>>> It would be nice if we could solve the IP clearance of the Leelo code >>>> as soon as possible [1]. We need a signed software grant [2] from >>>> Newcastle University. Then we need to update the license headers in >>>> all source files according to [3], that means the copyright notice >>>> should be moved to the NOTICE file. >>> >>> Lukasz, Maciej this is in your hands I think. Can you keep us posted? >>> >>> I'm happy to do the tidy up & some of the dull stuff thereafter. >>> >>> >>> p >>> >>>> Kind Regards, >>>> Stefan >>>> >>>> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/amber-leeloo.html >>>> [2] http://apache.org/licenses/software-grant.txt >>>> [3] http://apache.org/legal/src-headers.html >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 11:34 AM, Łukasz Moreń <[email protected] >>> >>> wrote: >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> I think there are some things that need to be improved before the >>> release. >>>>> Could you please suggest what Amber is currently missing what is >>> required >>>>> for the release or ideally try to fix it :)?. >>>>> With Maciej we will work on OAuth 2.0 module. From what I see should >> be >>>>> done: >>>>> >>>>> - unify maven dependencies in oauth 2.0 module by specifying versions >> in >>>>> <dependencyManagement> in the main pom >>>>> - change oauth 2.0 module version form 0.2-SNAPSHOT to 1.0-SNAPSHOT >>> (used by >>>>> the core pom) - is this change safe? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Lukasz Moren >>>>> >>> >>> >>
