Le 18 juin 2015 07:08, "Paul King" <[email protected]> a écrit : > > On 18/06/2015 2:49 PM, Jochen Theodorou wrote: >> >> Am 17.06.2015 18:41, schrieb Marvin Humphrey: >> [...] >>> >>> The Incubator should revisit its practices around such multi-party SGAs and >>> augment the process with additional safeguards. Ideally this issue should >>> have been caught prior to the VOTE to accept Groovy for incubation, allowing >>> both the Incubator PMC and the Groovy community to make a more informed >>> decision about the requirements of incubating at Apache. Despite our best >>> efforts over an extended discussion period, multiple opportunities were >>> missed. >> >> >> It is not like all javadoc comments are CC-BY-SA. It is about additional documentation like a user guide. The distribution can go without it in the worst case, and have it instead on another page in another repository. In other words, it is in no way elementary for the codebase. So it is in my eyes no critical part at all. >> >> bye blackdrag >> > > I agree with Jochen in that I wouldn't see this as blocking an incubator release. We can temporarily elide the user guide etc. from the source release. We can still publish it to a web site in the interim. >
It's worth noting that the build will fail if we remove the adoc files. It means more tweaking of our Gradle script. > Long term, we want to keep it all together though - we have tests against all sample code in the guide to ensure whenever we do a release the guide is correct. > > How does this process sound? > > * We create a Jira issue > * Get all adoc (guide) contributors that have Apache Jira access to indicate by way of comment on that issue that they are happy to release adoc under ASLv2 > * Potentially add other artifacts (emails/scanned documents) later if needed to complete the process. > > Cheers, Paul. > > > --- > This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. > https://www.avast.com/antivirus >
