Yeah, I understand why you would have been told that now after having witnessed some of the conflicting messages on other apache mailing lists. It's kind of hard to ignore statements from one of the apache founders, but at the same time I think the amount/caliber of donated hardware resources to the foundation has probably changed quite a bit since its inception. ...Hence the dual / confusing ambiguities with this policy.
I am certain of the license restrictions in any case and know everything in the "full" list is completely compatible with apache 2(meaning that including something like hibernate would of course still be a big no no). If no one minds I'd be happy to take full responsibility for any questions that come up from the release from the board / anywhere else. Looking at the other apache project releases I find it next to impossible to believe anyone would make a peep but you never know... I'll probably tag / release to temp tomorrow and start a vote then. On 6/23/07, andyhot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Well, you know, i've also asked about this before, cause i'm clearly in favor of a 'full' release - that's actually what https://nbtapestrysupport.dev.java.net/servlets/ProjectDocumentList?folderID=6266&expandFolder=6266&folderID=0 contains. The usual answer of course has been that we aren't allowed to ... but borrowing from a Cranberries album and from my next blog entry (T4+groovy) Everybody Else Is Doing It, So Why Can't We? Jesse Kuhnert wrote: > I took another look at our current releases and noticed that we aren't > exactly providing a lot in our distributions other than the tapestry jar > files themselves. > > While looking around the other various apache (or any OS project for that > matter) project release bundles I noticed that they do helpfully include > their dependencies / other things for their users. Specifically, we > can > look at either tomcat or struts - the recent struts release seems like a > good candidate to validate my argument though: > > http://struts.apache.org/download.cgi#struts208 > > If you look through the "full" release you'll find: > > apps/ - various war files > lib/ - All struts jars as well as all the other libraries it depends on. > Like OGNL / antlr / various apache commons things / etc.. > src/ - self descriptive > docs/ - Generated site documentation > > I've just finished refactoring the 4.1.2 maven2 assembly descriptors to > produce basically the same exact thing. All license files / notices / > etc > are in the right places but the release would also be completely self > contained. No need to download anything from anywhere else once you get > it. I'd like to get some feedback on this move before I actually > deploy it > to some kind of http://people.apache.org/~jkuhnert/release/ directory for > voting in case anyone sees any issues. > > I know we've heard variations on this P.O.V. in apache legal but am > starting > to wonder if the reality of what we see in all other apache project > releases > (meaning they include non apache jar dependencies as well, just hopefully > not gpl/lgpl / incompatible license dependencies) sort of dwarfs whatever > confusion may be coming from other sources. > > Ie. Why are we making users suffer when we don't have to? > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Jesse Kuhnert Tapestry/Dojo team member/developer Open source based consulting work centered around dojo/tapestry/tacos/hivemind. http://blog.opencomponentry.com
