+1 (site looks good, tag built fine with mvn install, artifacts look good)
Scott On 2/11/14, Scott Deboy <scott.de...@gmail.com> wrote: > I'll check it out..apologies! > > On 2/11/14, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Gentle reminder: we need one more PMC vote to be able to release. >> >> On Tuesday, February 11, 2014, Christian Grobmeier <grobme...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I think Rat is wrong on the jquery license. >>> >>> They have included a header, but its not identified by rat. >>> MIT is a clear "yes" for me. We have several other portions of MIT code >>> inside AL code (i.e. commons compress if i recall correctly). >>> >>> If we want to put it into the NOTICE file we need to make sure to add >>> bootstrap.min.js >>> and prettify.min.js as well (both AL 2.0) >>> >>> I would not use a CDN because people might download it for a reason - >>> maybe they >>> have no real connection where they want to work with it. >>> >>> >>> >>> On 11 Feb 2014, at 3:20, Gary Gregory wrote: >>> >>> This should be documented clearly in our build (in this case, in the >>> POM). >>>> >>>> Is the JQuery license compatible with ours? >>>> >>>> If you read https://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-a as a >>>> "yes" then the files RAT complains about can be excluded from the >>>> report. >>>> If you read it as a "no", then we cannot include JQuery. >>>> >>>> It reads like a "yes" to me. >>>> >>>> The next question is: Do we need to add JQuery to our NOTICE file? >>>> >>>> Gary >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 8:46 PM, Remko Popma <remko.po...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> I agree with Nick. >>>>> Didn't we discuss this before, for the beta-9 release (and came to the >>>>> same conclusion)? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Tuesday, February 11, 2014, Nick Williams < >>>>> nicho...@nicholaswilliams.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I'm not sure what our policy is, either, but there's nothing we can >>>>> do >>>>>> about it. We can't modify the license header of those files--that >>>>>> would >>>>>> be >>>>>> in violation of the license under which JQuery is made available. And >>>>>> ceasing to use JQuery would make the site not very good anymore. >>>>>> >>>>>> Either way, since this is JS for the site and not source code for >>>>>> Log4j, >>>>>> and since those files have been there for a very long time, I >>>>>> certainly >>>>>> don't think it should hold up this release. >>>>>> >>>>>> Nick >>>>>> >>>>>> On Feb 10, 2014, at 4:12 PM, Gary Gregory wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> RAT complains: >>>>>> >>>>>> ******************************* >>>>>> >>>>>> Unapproved licenses: >>>>>> >>>>>> src/site/resources/js/jquery.js >>>>>> src/site/resources/js/jquery.min.js >>>>>> >>>>>> ******************************* >>>>>> >>>>>> I'm not sure what our policy is for this kind of issue. >>>>>> >>>>>> Gary >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 2:56 PM, Nick Williams < >>>>>> nicho...@nicholaswilliams.net> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> On Feb 9, 2014, at 1:56 PM, Nick Williams wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *This is a vote to release Log4j 2.0-rc1, the twelfth release of >>>>>>> Log4j >>>>>>> 2.0.* >>>>>>> >>>>>>> <snip /> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Please test and cast your votes.* >>>>>>> [x] +1, release the artifacts >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [ ] -1, don't release because... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Nick >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org >>> >>> >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: log4j-dev-unsubscr...@logging.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: log4j-dev-h...@logging.apache.org
