Hi,

> 1. Sorry for 404 of how to build. It is caused by one of today's merge. 
> Document location changed. Just after William checked our release. I should 
> point it to our release TAG documents.[1]

Which is a good demonstration of why full instructions should be included in 
the release. :-)

> 2. The KEYS are used before and in ASF svn[2], and also in mail content, 
> `Keys to verify the Release Candidate :` section. Is something wrong about 
> this? I have checked locally again. .asc sign looks good.

There’s nothing wrong with teh KEYS or the signing it’s just a good idea to 
publish your keys so they are be easy to get at. This is a trivial issue, it 
just makes people life easier when reviewing or checking the release.

> 3. > - LICENSE need work as you are not complying with the terms of the MIT 
> license for iconfont as you need to include the full text of the license 
> iconfont hasn't independent license, we have already discussed that in last 
> vote. It belongs to antd project, which's license is already included in our 
> distribution. Do you mean we need to add full text of the license to our 
> source release too?

The MIT license specifies "The above copyright notice and this permission 
notice shall be included in all copies or substantial portions of the 
Software.” I believe you are missing that. This text (or a pointer to a file 
containing it) it is usually added to LICENSE. [1]

> 4. > - NOTICE doesn’t need to mention iconfont [1] MIT licensed items do not 
> need to be added to NOTICE
> I will remove that. Both NOTICEs in source and distribution, right?

Yes in general MIT and BSD don’t need to be included in NOTICE. (Also [1])

Thanks,
Justin

1. http://www.apache.org/dev/licensing-howto.html#permissive-deps
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to