Joerg Heinicke dijo: > On 15.02.2004 13:30, Antonio Gallardo wrote: > >>>> src/blocks/ojb/lib db-ojb-1.0.rc5-20040203.jar >>> >>>What happened here? >> >> Locally I mantain a builded copy of ojb with the lastest changes. To >> avoid >> every day changing the name in libs.xml I rename it to the lastest >> updated >> version in Cocoon. Evidently it was my fault to send them. Anyway it is >> a >> working copy already tested of the jar. > > Oh, that's an important issue! We will never get the correct source from > CVS if you switch the binary, but not the date! Please don't start with > such a Bad Thing (TM).
Don't worry. It is just an internal approach. When I update the lib in the Cocoon CVS the normal procedure is also change the date of the lib: See line 954 in: http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/cocoon-2.1/lib/jars.xml?r1=1.159&r2=1.160&diff_format=h See line 946 in: http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs.cgi/cocoon-2.1/lib/jars.xml?r1=1.149&r2=1.150&diff_format=h etc. But because I was too sleepy I committed not desired files. Sorry again for my mistake. > > File endings, local.*.properties1, deleted shell script - FIXED, thanks, > ok. > >>>> legal LICENSE.ant >>> >>>This file does not reference Ant in any way, it's just the common Apache >>>license. Should this be correct? >> >> I got this file from the root of the new Ant distribution. Seems like >> they >> did an error while updting the License. > >> Is OK if I fill the file instead of ant people? Is here somebody that >> can >> alert ant people about this issue? > > I don't know how to go on. I guess they should know it to have it fixed > in their CVS also. I will check and import it if they already did it. AFAIK, we cannot change 3rd party distribution. But can we change it in Ant case? I mean from the legal side of the thing. > >>>> tools/lib ant.jar >>> >>>Version? >> >> >> Last time I updated Ant. I noted some troubles in the scripts (.sh .bat) >> used to run Ant. This time I tried to avoid this problem by simply >> coping >> the files without any internal change. Also the ant version is presented >> as usual when we run the build.sh command. Knowing this I decided to not >> rename the ant.jar. Note that this file is not copied in the Cocoon >> distribution so the jar name validator does not check it. > > Ok, I can live with it. What do others think? > >>>> tools/bin antenv.cmd runrc.cmd ant.cmd envset.cmd >>> >>>Do we need them now? Furthermore they seem to have the wrong >>>license/copyright hint now. >> >> I decided to include them because AFAIK, there are for Win NT/2000/XP >> environment. Those files are included in ant. But if we don't need them >> I >> can remove it from the distribution. > >> What we can do here? >> >> 1. Remove the files >> 2. Change the header distributed by Ant >> 3. Leave them as they are now. >> >> Please comment. > > From what I can see these are new scripts and so simple starters for > Ant. As we include Ant in our dist and provide our own ant scripts we > can remove the files. For the licensing issue it's the same like above. > I guess they confirm themselves before their next release that every > licences are ok. > >> Thanks for pointing out all the errors I did, seems like I am too >> sleepy. :-D > > You seemed to been so tired that you sent two different mails :) Yep. I sleeped for 5 minuts before posting this second mail. Best Regards, Antonio Gallardo
