As I said; no vetos.
but we (Trinidad) got -1 and we were suggested to place them into
META-INF

That's what the maven-remote-resources-plugin does as well.

@Leonardo: did you use this plugin? Check the Trinidad profiles,
    for the best version; they help a lot.

I really appreciate this release, since it is very good
(replacement of JARs w/ RI is possible), but I prefer
the files to be in META-INF...

Perhaps it is only me :-)

On Dec 19, 2007 11:23 PM, Grant Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I'm not sure where you're getting your information from. See [1] for
> instructions on where and how to apply license and NOTICE files.
>
> [1] http://www.apache.org/dev/apply-license.html
>
>
>
> On 12/19/07, Matthias Wessendorf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > -1
> > the license/notice files are not located in META-INF
> > but they are in the JAR, that's right. But they should be placed
> > in META-INF.
> >
> > not sure if MYFACES-1790 is a showstopper.
> >
> > -M
> >
> > On Dec 19, 2007 11:11 PM, Matthias Wessendorf < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > I updated the dependency of the mfp to 126-SNAP.
> > > Did you notice that ?
> > >
> > > -M
> > >
> > >
> > > On Dec 19, 2007 8:49 PM, Leonardo Uribe < [EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > I was running the needed tasks to get the 1.2.1 release of Apache
> > > > MyFaces core out.
> > > >
> > > > Please note that this vote concerns all of the following parts:
> > > >  1. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.shared" v3.0.1  [1]
> > > >  2. Maven artifact group "org.apache.myfaces.core " v1.2.1  [1]
> > > >
> > > > The artifacts are deployed to my private Apache account ([1]).
> > > >
> > > > Please take a look at the "1.2.0" artifacts and vote!
> > > >
> > > > Please note: This vote is "majority approval" with a minimum of three
> > > > +1 votes (see [3]).
> > > >
> > > > ------------------------------------------------
> > > > [ ] +1 for community members who have reviewed the bits
> > > > [ ] +0
> > > > [ ] -1 for fatal flaws that should cause these bits not to be
> released,
> > > >     and why..............
> > > > ------------------------------------------------
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Leonardo Uribe
> > > >
> > > > [1] http://people.apache.org/~lu4242/myfaces121
> > > > [2] http://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html#ReleaseVotes
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Matthias Wessendorf
> > >
> > > further stuff:
> > > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> > > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> > > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matthias Wessendorf
> >
> > further stuff:
> > blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
> > sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
> > mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Grant Smith
>



-- 
Matthias Wessendorf

further stuff:
blog: http://matthiaswessendorf.wordpress.com/
sessions: http://www.slideshare.net/mwessendorf
mail: matzew-at-apache-dot-org

Reply via email to