Bump :)

Robbie

On 12 December 2012 12:58, Weston M. Price <[email protected]> wrote:

> Actually, looks much more simple...appears some forgetful developer simply
> did not include the license (uh...yeah, that'd be me).
>
> Now I remember that it was the JBoss7 configuration that had the issue and
> not the glassfish stuff. I will take care of it.
>
>
> On Dec 12, 2012, at 6:11 AM, Weston M. Price <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> > On Dec 11, 2012, at 5:41 PM, Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> >
> >> The XML files in question seem to be for Glassfish rather than JBoss
> >> (though there is also a properties file in the list which is for JBoss)
> ?
> >>
> >> qpid-0.20-rc2/java/jca/example/conf/glassfish-ejb-jar.xml
> >> qpid-0.20-rc2/java/jca/example/conf/glassfish-resources.xml
> >> qpid-0.20-rc2/java/jca/example/conf/glassfish-web.xml
> >> qpid-0.20-rc2/java/jca/example/conf/jboss-ejb-client.properties
> >>
> >> If having a comment in an XML file causes something to barf it sounds
> like
> >> a bug to me :)
> >>
> >> We could do something as simple as generating the XML files used by the
> >> example binary instead of committing them directly into the tree? That
> way
> >> the base file thats doing the generation would be licenced but the
> >> generated output for the binary need not.
> >> (Albeit ugly, a bog standard ant echo could do the trick and the
> actually
> >> content would look bascally the same to read/edit.)
> >>
> > Yep, all makes sense. I will take a look today. Thanks for the
> input/observations.
> >
> >> Robbie
> >>
> >> On 11 December 2012 18:15, Weston M. Price <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Ok, I do remember this now (getting old). In some of the files,
> including
> >>> the license causes issues with the generation, most notably JBoss7. I
> will
> >>> take a closer look but I do remember trying to get the license in there
> >>> before and not having any success without resorting to an XSL
> >>> transformation after the generation which seemed a bit much to me at
> the
> >>> time.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Dec 11, 2012, at 12:12 PM, Robbie Gemmell <[email protected]
> >
> >>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Ah, I didnt actually look at them :)
> >>>>
> >>>> I have updated all the files in the Java tree I think are required
> >>> (except
> >>>> the JCA related XML configs, I'll defer to Westin on whether those
> can be
> >>>> licenced). The changes are committed to trunk as the following
> commit, to
> >>>> be merged upon approval:
> >>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=1420285
> >>>>
> >>>> Robbie
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 11 December 2012 16:37, Gordon Sim <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 12/11/2012 03:51 PM, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> I ran RAT over the RC2 'full source release' archive, and it seems
> to
> >>> have
> >>>>>> turned up several files that need licences added in the CPP and Java
> >>>>>> trees.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> The output is available here:
> >>>>>>
> http://people.apache.org/~**robbie/qpid/0.20/0.20rc2_rat_**output.txt<
> >>> http://people.apache.org/~robbie/qpid/0.20/0.20rc2_rat_output.txt>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Can someone take a look at the files in the CPP tree?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> qpid-0.20-rc2/cpp/src/qpid/**broker/DeliveryAdapter.h
> >>>>>> qpid-0.20-rc2/cpp/src/qpid/**broker/LegacyLVQ.cpp
> >>>>>> qpid-0.20-rc2/cpp/src/qpid/**broker/LegacyLVQ.h
> >>>>>> qpid-0.20-rc2/cpp/src/qpid/**broker/TxOpVisitor.h
> >>>>>> qpid-0.20-rc2/cpp/src/qpid/**broker/TxPublish.cpp
> >>>>>> qpid-0.20-rc2/cpp/src/qpid/**broker/TxPublish.h
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> These are all empty files. Looks like a deletion that didn't actually
> >>>>> delete the files, just the content. I've removed them from trunk (
> >>>>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?**rev=1420258&view=rev<
> >>> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1420258&view=rev>)
> >>>>> and can do so for the release branch if desired/approved...
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> ------------------------------**------------------------------**---------
> >>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected].**org<
> >>> [email protected]>
> >>>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >>>
> >>>
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> >
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>

Reply via email to