Sorry for being late to the party, but I just wanted to point out that in case 
you aren’t aware votes are not required for these kinds of things - you can 
simply start a discussion and see if anyone objects.  If someone wants to 
discuss it it can also get messy as you will mix a bunch of discussion emails 
in your vote thread.  That said, there is nothing wrong with asking for a vote 
if you want formal permission.

Also - does FreeMarker follow Commit-Then-Review (CTR) or Review-Then-Commit 
(RTC)? I am guessing CTR (which is my personal preference) but a lot of the 
Hadoop-based projects have been using RTC with reviewboard.  

Ralph

> On Sep 14, 2015, at 11:10 AM, Daniel Dekany <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Yet another voting with lazy consensus... silence gives assent. 72
> hours left.
> 
> I think we have to drop JSP 1.2 support in 2.3.24 because of legal
> reasons. The jps-api 1.2 artifact can't be found in the Maven Central
> Repo, and it can't be upload for legal reasons. This means that as far
> as FreeMarker 2.3.x depends on it, it can't be built without
> developers getting that jar themselves and putting it into the Ivy
> cache or something. (It has worked so far because freemarker.org has
> hosted it in its own Ivy repo, but doing such legally gray things
> won't go anymore as we move the site to the ASF's infrastructure.)
> 
> JSP 1.2 was part of J2EE 1.3 (September 24, 2001), and was replaced by
> JSP 2.0 in J2EE 1.4 (November 11, 2003). So hopefully not many users
> will be hurt.
> 
> -- 
> Thanks,
> Daniel Dekany
> 
> 


Reply via email to