[gwt-contrib] Preliminary testing for GWT 2.10 release

[Colin Alworth]

TL;DR: If you have the capability to do so, now would be an excellent time 
to help us test GWT in anticipation of a release, especially around the 
groupId change we're going to make.

--

We think that we're one merge away from being ready for a GWT 2.10 release, 
so I'm starting the release process a bit early, since this last commit 
involves changing GWT's groupId away from com.google and to org.gwtproject.

To that end, I have a maven repo with the maven changes along wit all of 
the other changes in the GWT 2.10 series. The repo's URL is 
https://repo.vertispan.com/gwt-groupid-migration-test/, and the only GWT 
version that exists there is "2.10.0-new-groupid-2".

Based on earlier work (such as in the 
https://groups.google.com/g/google-web-toolkit-contributors/c/L2RMqglOEXo/m/44BeZKeBCQAJ
 
thread), this should allow projects to transition from com.google.gwt to 
org.gwtproject by adding the org.gwtproject:gwt:pom to their project, and 
then specify gwt-user etc, and automatically manage the version of gwt used 
by dependencies. It should also be possible to just use the old groupid for 
this release, but later releases will not have that option.

Please note that *packages are not changing *as part of this transition, 
only groupIds.

Rough release notes:
 * Updated htmlunit and jetty to more recent versions
 * Dropped support for IE8/9/10
 * Dropped support for Java 7
 * Support long classpaths by using CLASSPATH env vars to run child 
permutation workers
 * Many enhancements to emulation APIs and generated code

Please reply to this thread or email me directly with any 
results/surprises/questions.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT 
Contributors" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to google-web-toolkit-contributors+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/dad1685b-9ad0-4a1a-88f4-dd0332d7b91dn%40googlegroups.com.

[gwt-contrib] License for gwt-site content

[Colin Alworth]

See the question raised at 
https://github.com/gwtproject/gwt-site/issues/328.

While gwtproject explicitly licenses all "software and sample code" as 
under the Apache License 2.0, it appears that we don't have a license 
specified for the contents of the gwtproject website 
(https://gwtproject.org, https://github.com/gwtproject/gwt-site/). A case 
could be made that the content is already licensed as under the same 
license. It was my understanding that this is discouraged (though at the 
moment I'm having a hard time seeing why that would be). I can find 
concrete examples of the Apache Foundation licensing their documentation 
under the Apache License
 * https://github.com/apache/couchdb-documentation
 * https://github.com/apache/cordova-docs

On the other hand, if the Apache license that applies to all code and 
samples does not apply to the contents, then each author owns their own 
content directly.

I am not a lawyer, but my understanding is that (at least in the country in 
which I reside) content is copyrighted by default, and the author owns that 
copyright. Additional rights must be granted by the author. If we want to 
change the license, we need the approval of the authors so far - 
https://github.com/gwtproject/gwt-site/graphs/contributors. Anyone who 
doesn't approve would need to have their content removed, if we decide to 
change.

Are we sufficiently clear that all content is Apache licensed, including 
the website documentation? Is there a good reason to consider a different 
license instead? Should we seek confirmation from any authors of 
substantial amounts of content that their content falls under the license 
we choose?

My suggestion is to clarify that all content is under the Apache License, 
and see a confirmation from any author who wrote more than ~5 lines of 
content. If we think we are already clear that all content is under that 
license, then we should state that in an up front way, such as setting the 
"license" metadata of the gwt-site repo, and adding a LICENSE file.

Thoughts, suggestions, pointers to how other projects have handled this?

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GWT 
Contributors" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to google-web-toolkit-contributors+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/google-web-toolkit-contributors/45f473b5-4d2d-4016-b76d-29210128de27n%40googlegroups.com.