Oh gosh, time flies, sorry about that. On Wednesday 25 March 2009 20:25:36, Danny Backx wrote: > Apologies for not replying sooner. Busy busy. > > On Wed, 2009-03-11 at 05:42 -0700, Eric House wrote: > > I'm filing an "Intent to Package" which wants to know: > > > > * Version? Is there a more recent tarball than 0.51.0 that has a version > > number associated? I guess I'm looking for something like a "stable" > > snapshot to start with -- if there is such a thing. Worst case I guess > > I pull the trunk and use 0.0.<svn rev> :-) > > That is the most recent version. > > > * author[s]? Danny and Pedro? Ok to include the emails you use here? > > Using our names : yes. (Pedro, speak up if you don't agree.)
Sure, it's fine. > Using E-mail addresses ? Hmm, I'd like to avoid that. Can you leave them > out ? Or can you put cegcc-devel@lists.sourceforge.net in ? It's more > appropriate than our individual addresses. > > > * licence? GPL, right? > > Heh, no. ... Right, cegcc is built from several separate programs and libs, each has its own license. -- Pedro Alves ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Stay on top of everything new and different, both inside and around Java (TM) technology - register by April 22, and save $200 on the JavaOne (SM) conference, June 2-5, 2009, San Francisco. 300 plus technical and hands-on sessions. Register today. Use priority code J9JMT32. http://p.sf.net/sfu/p _______________________________________________ Cegcc-devel mailing list Cegcc-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cegcc-devel
