On 10/31/05, Dave Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Oct 31, 2005, at 4:54 PM, Henri Yandell wrote: > > > > To business. Where are we on the following: > > * Informed Incubator PMC of the result (and they're happy about the > > LGPL bit?) > > Not sure about this one. We haven't be told how we can resolve the LGPL > issue. Since this is not an official or sanctioned release, I think we > are, to quote Sam Ruby on the topic of the Roller 1.3 release: "good to > go".
My worry is that we'll be hammered for releasing with LGPL via the ASF, and hammered for releasing outside the ASF. This'll be an official release as far as I understand; ie) we'll be putting it on the mirrors and announcing to some portion of the user community even if it's just those who read the wiki page. Cc'ing Noel as I don't think I got added to the Incubator PMC list (if I did then it's very, very quiet). Noel, what's your take on the status of this release? > > * Apache webpage to point to the downloads (rather than > > rollerweblogger one, unsure where the move to an ASF website fits > > currently)? > > No. This one is linked into the status of the release I'm guessing. If a full ASF release, then we'll need a webpage so that a person who is sent there to download the project is well aware it is meant to be coming from the ASF mirrors. If we're in some kind of half-world still, ie) just using ASF mirrors, then maybe we don't even need this page. > > * All problems with RC files fixed? > > Not sure what you mean. The stuff Anil brought up; though I think those were to do with the wiki site instead of the actual release files. Basically a 'has someone looked at the tar.gz/zips, and do they appear to work' bit. Planning to take a look at them myself. Do a full Postgres install and make sure it starts up okay etc. > > * Release tagged? > > No. I can do this part tonight. Cool. Hen
