Hi Jeremias,
Jeremias Maerki wrote:
+1 for the release of Batik 1.6, provided you can answer the question below with yes.
Thanks.
If there are known issues that are non-critical this is ok, especially if they are documented.
Yes, you will have to update the LICENSE file for pdf-transcoder.jar to
ALv2 since it applies to the "batik-1_6" tag on the FOP codebase.
I've already done this locally.
Xerces 2.5.0, however, was released in 2003 under the older ALv1.1 so you shouldn't update this one unless you upgrade to the current Xerces release prior to doing the release.
This is what I thought. I just wanted to make sure that making a release that included ALv1.1 would be Ok.
Rhino: Now this is interesting. Cocoon uses Rhino-1.6R1 and claims it is distributed under the MPL 1.1 but when I download either 1.6R1 or 1.5R4.1 (the one Batik uses according to the license file) then I see a reference to NPL 1.1 for both. The website says the same [1]. I found a post by Greg Stein from Jan 2004 (on the discontinued licensing mailing list) that NPL and MPL 1.0 are not ok, while MPL 1.1 is ok. Anyway, I don't see this as a showstopper for the release as we're not doing anything else than Cocoon. But I want to get this clarified.
Are there four licenses NPL 1.0, MPL 1.0 (both not OK), NPL 1.1 (unknown status), MPL 1.1 (is OK) or was there a typo above?
Also you say this isn't a show stopper but you want to get it clarified. Does this mean that as far as you are concerned I can go ahead, or should I wait on the clarification?
One question: Is the pdf-transcoder.jar revision 1.9 [2] the one you created from the "batik-1_6" tag in FOP? I can't be sure from the log entry.
Yes, it is, I forgot to include it in the log message (I would have updated the log entry if we were using SVN ;).
Lastly, I'd have preferred that the final vote only ran on batik-dev (for the Batik committers) and xmlgraphics-general (for the PMC). There's a bit too much noise ATM.
Do I really need to run another vote on batik-dev? Cameron has already given his +1 twice. BTW the mod-box doesn't seem to be collecting mails for April...
[1] http://www.mozilla.org/rhino/download.html [2] http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/xml-batik/lib/pdf-transcoder.jar?rev=1.9&view=log
On 02.04.2005 16:48:52 Thomas DeWeese wrote:
Hi PMC,
I am requesting a vote on releasing Batik 1.6.
I have created a tag "batik-1_6" that indicates the code under consideration. All issues raised on batik-dev (basically just comments on problems with javadocs) have been addressed.
Sorry, I don't seem to be able to track down the thread on mail-archives.eu.apache.org.
I consider there to be one potentially known bug with regards to setting documents on the Canvas, I believe the bug has been in Batik since it's last release 1.5.1 and had, to date, not been noticed. I considered it more risky to try and fix at this point than to leave the code as is:
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=34234
The only other issue I can think of is that the current LICENSE files for pdf-transcoder.jar and xerces_2_5_0.jar are the old 1.1 Apache License. I will update the pdf-transcoder license to the 2.0, I am unsure if I can do that for xerces since I think the jar we are using was released under the 1.1 license, and I would rather not update the jar at this late date - Opinions?
Also along these lines there was some question on the Rhino License (Mozilla) when Apache adopted the 2.0 license, last I heard we could continue to use it, but things may have changed without me knowing about it.
Any other comments or concerns?
Jeremias Maerki
--------------------------------------------------------------------- Apache XML Graphics Project URL: http://xmlgraphics.apache.org/ 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]
