I think I've fixed the issues raised, and I've reformated the NOTICE files
to remove the style of comment Kevan mentioned. The NOTICE files now look
like this:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openejb/branches/eclipse-plugins-1.0.0.alpha/NOTICE

Please note I've only removed the these comments, I haven't changed the
content of the files.

If someone is able to double-check some of the NOTICE files and advise if
there's still a problem, I'd be grateful. If everything is looking good I'll
try a new vote in the next couple of days.

Jon

On Wed, Sep 23, 2009 at 10:11 AM, David Blevins <[email protected]>wrote:

>
> On Sep 22, 2009, at 5:16 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
>
>
>> On Sep 22, 2009, at 1:39 PM, Jonathan Gallimore wrote:
>>
>>  Hi Kevan,
>>>
>>> Many thanks for looking at this and pointing out these issues. I'll
>>> cancel
>>> this vote, and try again.
>>>
>>> Regarding point 4 - pretty much all of the content in the LICENSE and
>>> NOTICE
>>> files is the same as the files in OpenEJB itself, as the dependencies are
>>> the same. Presumably that means we have potentially the same issue with
>>> OpenEJB itself (
>>>
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openejb/trunk/openejb3/assembly/openejb-standalone/src/main/resources/NOTICE.txtfor
>>> example)?
>>>
>>
>> Yes. Personally, I don't think they'd have to be cleaned up for a service
>> release (e.g. 3.1.x). But should be cleaned up before the next major
>> release.
>>
>> I'm probably guilty of creating that comments style, in the first place.
>> Licensing policies/best practices evolve over time -- hopefully getting
>> better... ;-)
>>
>
> Thanks, Kevan, for the legal scouring.  Very appreciated.  Been over a
> barrel on our stateful tx/caching issue.
>
>
> -David
>
>

Reply via email to