Hi James,
On 1/17/13 7:14 AM, "Masanz, James J." <[email protected]> wrote: >Pei had opened LEGAL-154 >https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-154 >and that received a comment from Craig L Russell, stating the intended >use seemed ok to him. > >Can you suggest how we should proceed with that so the issue can be >considered 'cleared'? Yep here's how: put a comment on that issue that via lazy consensus, you are going to assume that in 48 hours if there are no objections that everyone is happy with Craig's comment and that cTAKES will proceed. In the meanwhile the VOTE just stays open and hopefully in 48 hours, Jukka and/or others will be willing to give it a +1 at that point. Thanks, Chris > >Thanks, >James Masanz > > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ctakes-dev-return-1041-Masanz.James=mayo....@incubator.apache.org >> >>[mailto:ctakes-dev-return-1041-Masanz.James=mayo....@incubator.apache.org >>] >> On Behalf Of Jukka Zitting >> Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 3:30 AM >> To: ctakes-dev >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache cTAKES 3.0.0-incubating RC5 release >> >> Hi, >> >> On Thu, Jan 10, 2013 at 5:43 PM, Chen, Pei >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> > This is a call for a vote on releasing the following candidate as >>Apache >> cTAKES 3.0.0-incubating. >> >> +0 >> >> The release looks pretty good, but I'd feel more comfortable voting +1 >>if >> the licensing status discussed with RC4 got documented better and >>ideally >> cleared through a LEGAL issue. Pei's rationale about the data falling >> under the normal contributor license sounds convincing, but I'm not >> intimate enough with copyright law to be able to tell whether those >>files >> could instead be interpreted as derivative works of the upstream data >>and >> thus constrained by the upstream license. >> >> BR, >> >> Jukka Zitting
