On Feb 18, 2009, at 9:54 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
On Feb 17, 2009, at 12:32 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:
None of those files are included in a release.
They're part of the source release, whether or not they're in the
binary distribution is irrelevant...
The binary files (build, extract, etc) are pretty trivial. So, I
wouldn't require a re-release for those... They look like somebody's
private build tools. I doubt they should really be in svn. Some of
them don't look like they'd work (i.e. rebuild is calling
'nukeTargets').
Sure, they could be removed, they are the scripts I run, I got tired
of having to recreate them when my laptop drive kept crashing.
NOTES.txt looks like a todo list. Prolly should be removed, but I
wouldn't hold up a release for that either.
Um, why would I want to remove a todo list?
What about README.txt should that also be removed?
The above files should be cleaned up on trunk...
Why?
Assume GShell.mdxml is generated by a tool, and therefore wouldn't
require a license header. Are you using this as a development aid?
This is the MagicDraw UML models for the project.
* * *
IMO, the source distribution already contains a top-level LICENSE.txt
and NOTICE.txt and that should be good enough to cover any of the
files which are in question.
--jason
