Myrna van Lunteren wrote:
On Mon, Nov 15, 2010 at 8:26 AM, Rick Hillegas <[email protected]> wrote:
I need a volunteer to build the Eclipse ui plugin for Derby 10.7.1.0.
Thanks,
-Rick
I've been thinking about this - knew it was coming, of course.
But neither the ui nor doc plugin source has changed in more than 2
years, so there really is no need to make a new plugin - it's just
going to be the same as the older one (except the files will have a
newer date...).
The *core* plugin is what has the derby jars in it, and thus needs to
be build for each release, and you took care of that.
I propose that I will test the old ui/doc plugin with the new core
plugin, and if it works fine, we can just change the name of the zip
file, and then you sign it, of course, to give a stamp of approval for
10.7.
Thanks, Myrna. This sounds like a great plan.
If this artifact doesn't change much, would it make sense to check it
into the Derby codeline? Then the release manager would just pick up the
checked-in version when building a release. The release manager would
just assume that Eclipse enthusiasts in the community had kept the
checked-in version evergreen. I don't think there should be any
licensing problems here, for the following reasons:
o I cracked open this artifact. It already claims to be licensed under
Apache v2.0. Individual pieces of text-based content in the artifact
also have the Apache copyright header.
o The remaining bits seem to be executable code. I assume that code was
produced from some combination of Derby and Eclipse sources. According
to this web page, the Apache license is compatible with compiled forms
of code if the source itself was open-sourced under EPL, the Eclipse
license: http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b
Does this sound like a good approach for the future?
Thanks,
-Rick
Let me know if you still want a new zip file, I volunteer to make one
if you want.
Myrna
