/ Michael Glavassevich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
| I think since Norm is the author of xmlresolver.dev.java.net he could
| relicense it under the Apache license and donate it to xml-commons if he
| chooses. Would probably be a good idea to follow-up on the
| [EMAIL PROTECTED] list if f
Hi Earl,
GPL is a non-starter here. You cannot include code under this license in any
Apache project. Be very careful if you're taking a look at GPL code and
contributing to similar Apache projects (so as not to indavertently
contaminate the codebase). I personally avoid looking at it altogether
On August 14, 2008 at 13:40, Norman Walsh wrote:
> I'm unlikely to have a lot of time to work on it, so I think it's
> reasonable to transition the maintenance over to others.
Thanks for responding.
It does seem that some action on commons-resolver is occuring,
with those having commit access st
/ "Earl Hood" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> was heard to say:
| If you no longer have the time and resources to work on the
| resolver, are you open to transitioning maintenance to others
| whom have cycles to spare?
Sorry, I didn't mean to leave this unanswered for so long. Getting
ramped up in my new job
Michael Glavassevich wrote:
> Earl Hood wrote:
> >
> > The revision number is bogus since it is based on the svn revision
> > of the repo I imported that 1.2 source release.
> >
> > The diffs are against the released 1.2 source. If required,
> > I can see if the diffs need to be redone against the
No changes have been made to the resolver code since the 1.2 release.
Michael Glavassevich
XML Parser Development
IBM Toronto Lab
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Earl Hood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote on 06/24/2008 08:00:47 PM:
> The revision number is bogus since it is based on
On June 24, 2008 at 16:24, David Crossley wrote:
> Earl, while reviewing some of your patches, i see that you
> appear to be using an old version of xml-commons. Your diffs
> say "revision 2813", yet the current revision (last change from
> mrglavas) is 669794.
The revision number is bogus since
Earl, while reviewing some of your patches, i see that you
appear to be using an old version of xml-commons. Your diffs
say "revision 2813", yet the current revision (last change from
mrglavas) is 669794.
See the "Where can I get the source code?" section at
http://xml.apache.org/commons/
i.e.
htt
David Crossley wrote:
> Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> > David Crossley wrote:
> >
> > > I will try to configure Gump to run the tests that we have.
> >
> > Ping me if you need a hand.
>
> Thanks Stefan, i just finished adding that, so we will
> see how we go on Gump's next run.
Woops, i see from your
Stefan Bodewig wrote:
> David Crossley wrote:
>
> > I will try to configure Gump to run the tests that we have.
>
> Ping me if you need a hand.
Thanks Stefan, i just finished adding that, so we will
see how we go on Gump's next run.
-David
On Thu, 19 Jun 2008, David Crossley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I recall that Norm asked here about further development. I thought
> that he received good response, but now he has gone elsewhere to
> start another one. Of course that is up to him. Thanks heaps for
> all of your work Norm.
+1
There have never been many developers contributing to Resolver,
and now there are starting to be more. So i think that the
community is gradually evolving. I am surprised that there is not
more activity - it is such an important tool.
I recall that Norm asked here about further development. I thou
[Note, please trim replies of unnecessary quoted text]
On June 18, 2008 at 08:26, don wrote:
> Surely the existing code was released after passing a set of "thoroughly
> researched test scripts." Aren't these test scripts are still available
> in CVS or Subversion. I assume what you want is for
From: Shane Curcuru [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2008 8:12 AM
To: commons-dev@xml.apache.org
Cc: Earl Hood; Norman Walsh
Subject: Re: Future of xml-commons-resolver development and maintenance
Indeed, the ASF is a meritocracy, and welcomes input from everyone, both
in the form of p
Indeed, the ASF is a meritocracy, and welcomes input from everyone, both
in the form of patches from everyone, as well as code checkins, once
someone becomes a committer on any project.
The issue here is validating that the patches submitted properly follow
the various XML-ish specs available.
Hi Earl,
In case it wasn't obvious, anyone can start contributing to the project if
they're interested and potentially become one of its committers. The caveat
being that there needs to be an existing committer around who has the time
and ability to review patches and also PMC oversight for relea
16 matches
Mail list logo
