Hi Chris, I don't have access to close the LEGAL issue that Pei opened. Am I supposed to get that or is that limited to some subgroup of Apache committers
________________________________________ From: ctakes-dev-return-1067-Masanz.James=mayo....@incubator.apache.org [ctakes-dev-return-1067-Masanz.James=mayo....@incubator.apache.org] on behalf of Mattmann, Chris A (388J) [[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, January 19, 2013 2:30 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache cTAKES 3.0.0-incubating RC5 release Great job! Feel free to close the LEGAL issue now. On 1/19/13 11:53 AM, "Masanz, James J." <[email protected]> wrote: >Now that 48 hours passed since I added the comment to LEGAL-154 about >lazy consensus, I've added another comment that cTAKES will proceed by >lazy consensus with including the index of words and word counts. > >-- James > >> -----Original Message----- >> From: ctakes-dev-return-1045-Masanz.James=mayo....@incubator.apache.org >> >>[mailto:ctakes-dev-return-1045-Masanz.James=mayo....@incubator.apache.org >>] >> On Behalf Of Masanz, James J. >> Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 9:40 AM >> To: '[email protected]' >> Subject: RE: [VOTE] Apache cTAKES 3.0.0-incubating RC5 release >> >> Thanks Chris! >> I added such a comment to LEGAL-154. >> >> -- James >> >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: >> > ctakes-dev-return-1044-Masanz.James=mayo....@incubator.apache.org >> > [mailto:[email protected]. >> > org] >> > On Behalf Of Mattmann, Chris A (388J) >> > Sent: Thursday, January 17, 2013 9:33 AM >> > To: [email protected] >> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Apache cTAKES 3.0.0-incubating RC5 release >> > >> > 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:[email protected]. >> > >>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 >
