Justin, regardless of the perceived tone of Alex's message, the content of
it should not be dismissed. You always seem to raise new licensing issues
at the last minute before a release. This timing can be extremely
frustrating for the rest of us.

- Josh

On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 3:15 PM, Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> > I don't think there is a problem.  Let's push npm out so we can push out
> > the announcement.  If there is a problem it can be rectified.
>
> I was suggesting that care be taken. You yourself stated that the npm
> release contained code from the nightly. [1]
>
> > This is another example of why the board and mentors recommend that
> folks who want
> > to be sticklers about policy should be watching the commit lists and
> > raising issues early, not at the last minute where it delays the work of
> > the folks who are actually contributing code to the release.
>
> No it is not. If you referencing to the FlexJS release I did report issues
> before the RC was made. For instance [2] there are also earlier emails.
>
> > "minor" policy issues should be investigated and presented in more detail
> > and in a collaborative fashion
>
> I am acting in a collaborative fashion and providing detail were needed,
> Where there is an issue I suggest a way to fix it, for instance replacing
> content of dubious IP [3] with one of known licensing or with licensing
> issues.[2].
>
> > instead of accusing other PMC members.
>
> On evidence in this public list it seem to me that the only person making
> unfounded accusations is you and I regard this as a person attack. Please
> apologise for your statements.
>
> Justin
>
> 1. https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/a496e2b6595fcf303b13af962f641b
> ec42bf20687f2de07b0df63483@%3Cdev.flex.apache.org%3E
> 2. https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/95ba7d9eb5a83cfa8411b933d00ba6
> fde4c8b982feecc823e7fdbdc4@%3Cdev.flex.apache.org%3E
> 3. https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/92901b973714c6a12853aa8ed2972c
> abb529dfcff065b870e22dbb0a@%3Cdev.flex.apache.org%3E
>
>

Reply via email to