On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 6:21 PM, Alex Harui <[email protected]> wrote:
> Some issues are more controversial than others. The controversial ones > should be decided before committing changes. > Fair enough. But that said, I do see Justin's point that he does not want to make the changes if there is a threat of a veto. How can we separate out things so that the easy to fix ones don't end up clubbed together with controversial ones? In other words, how can we make it easier for Justin to go ahead and JFDI? Thanks, Om > > Sent from my LG G3, an AT&T 4G LTE smartphone > > ------ Original message------ > *From: *OmPrakash Muppirala > *Date: *Thu, Sep 15, 2016 5:41 PM > *To: *[email protected]; > *Subject:*Re: [DRAFT] Apache FlexJS 0.7.0 and Apache Flex FalconJX 0.7.0 > Released > > On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 4:42 PM, Justin Mclean <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > > Justin, any reason you did not fix the issues yourself? Were you > > expecting > > > someone else to fix them? > > > > If I had changed LICENSE/NOTICE without discussion it’s probable that my > > changes would be vetoed. > > > > I doubt that would happen. Maybe you should try fixing them and see what > happens? ;-) > > Thanks, > Om > > > > > > > Also, why were no JIRA tickets filed? > > > > For these exact issue no a sI had expected it to be resolved before the > RC > > was made. I usually raise them after the release so it's not forgotten > > about before the next one - for instance [1] > > > > I think you should create tickets for each licensing issue you bring up. > a) It would be easier for anyone else (ex. Legal folks) to come take a > look and quickly give an opinion and b) We have a record that we did > actually discuss this issue and made an effort to resolve the issue. > > Thanks, > Om > > > > > > Thanks, > > Justin > > > > 1. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FLEX-35058 >
