What happened to this vote?  I checked the tags and the code was never moved
over.  Did this pass?  Do we have an official binary I can link to on the
wiki docs?

On Mon, Nov 12, 2007 at 4:52 PM, Kevan Miller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

>
> On Nov 6, 2007, at 9:03 PM, Lin Sun wrote:
>
> > The .project and .classpath files are used when the plugins are loaded
> > in Eclipse IDE.    You are right they don't have ASL license headers
> > but I don't see license headers associated with these files normally.
> > The files in the geronimo eclipse plugin don't have ASL license
> > headers either.   Also, these files are not in the assembly.
>
> Are these files machine generated? Whether or not they end up in an
> assembly doesn't really matter... They seem non-trivial to me and
> should have a license header.
>
> >
> >
> > I am not sure what we need to do with jboss here.   Of course we are
> > using it since it is a migration tool from jboss to geronimo.  Any
> > advice here?
>
>
> I did a little research for this. It seems we must avoid implying that
> JBoss is the source of this code. As long as the distribution name
> (and executable name, I would think) don't use "JBoss" in the name
> we're doing this. Internal file names should be fine. So, in my
> opinion, we're ok here...
>
> So, pending the license header and file permission questions, I'd say
> this looks good.
>
> --kevan
>
>


-- 
~Jason Warner

Reply via email to