[jira] [Commented] (EDGENT-273) Add scripts, etc to enable building samples against a binary-release

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/EDGENT-273?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16191840#comment-16191840 ] Dale LaBossiere commented on EDGENT-273: the way the samples are being handled and distributed is

[jira] [Resolved] (EDGENT-334) Release Apache Edgent 1.1.0

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/EDGENT-334?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Dale LaBossiere resolved EDGENT-334. Resolution: Fixed 1.1.0 has been available for a while now > Release Apache Edgent 1.1.0 >

[jira] [Commented] (EDGENT-413) Simplify download experience

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/EDGENT-413?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16191817#comment-16191817 ] Dale LaBossiere commented on EDGENT-413: this is being addressed as part of the maven retooling -

[jira] [Commented] (EDGENT-418) Think LICENSE/NOTICE in binary release .jar & .war are wrong

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/EDGENT-418?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel=16191815#comment-16191815 ] Dale LaBossiere commented on EDGENT-418: The war's license/notice content is being addressed as

[jira] [Assigned] (EDGENT-418) Think LICENSE/NOTICE in binary release .jar & .war are wrong

[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/EDGENT-418?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ] Dale LaBossiere reassigned EDGENT-418: -- Assignee: Dale LaBossiere > Think LICENSE/NOTICE in binary release .jar & .war are

Re: maven: supplemental-model.xml

Hi Chris, To keep things moving along, I decided that for now we can do without supplemental-model.xml so I delivered commit 29cb372 to remove remnants of it. We can always revert the commit later if its need becomes clear. — Dale > On Oct 3, 2017, at 1:27 PM, Dale LaBossiere

pom errors/warnings in Eclipse

Hi Chris, I just committed changes to eliminate the error and last warning below. Don’t know if there’s anything that can be done about the “Access” warnings. Eclipse isn’t offering a quick fix to squelch it. — Dale > On Oct 3, 2017, at 3:23 PM, Dale LaBossiere wrote: >

maven: java7 & android jars lack META-INF/LICENSE and NOTICE

Hi Chris, I noticed that the java7 and android jars (other than those for the console) lack META-INF/{LICENSE,NOTICE} A while ago a separate NOTICE file was added to each project with an applicable “has IBM contribs” NOTICE. Earlier today I added even standard (non-IBM-contrib) NOTICE files to

Re: [apache/incubator-edgent] Migration of the Edgent project to be able to build with Apache Maven (#309)

Looks like we’re tripping over each other a bit :-) So the changes in this commit are ineffective…. Prior to this I refactored some of this and renamed those license files and removed inappropriate ones (rationale in the commit’s comment 6f73637). I think everything in licenses should be

Re: removal of DEPENDENCIES

I may have misunderstood the earlier commit - I just looked at the comment. I think it’s right to omit bundled content from DEPENDENCIES. I thought the change would eliminate generation of the file. So I think we may be all set on this one. — Dale > On Oct 4, 2017, at 11:44 AM, Christofer Dutz

Re: removal of DEPENDENCIES

Hi Dale, Well in that case I would suggest that we use the mechanism to show real dependencies. With all the “optional” stuff we sort of had dependencies and “what’s included” all mixed up. However, the dependencies are usually modelled in the pom.xml so adding that to a DEPENDENCIES text is

Re: maven: appended-resources/licenses

Hi, > I meant say/ask: Any bundled artifact that has applicable NOTICE info, not > typical, must have it added to the bundle’s NOTICE, regardless of the bundled > artifact's license type. > Hence a bundled ALv2 licensed artifact that has a non-default NOTICE needs to > have that added to the

removal of DEPENDENCIES

Hi Chris, While Justin noted that DEPENDENCIES wasn’t required, it’s a standard maven-ism and I don’t think we should remove it. IMO, there’s definite value to users of one of our jars/war to be able to open it up and easily see that info. Don’t you agree? — Dale > On Oct 4, 2017, at 4:29

Re: maven: d3.legend.js mods

I’ll take a look, a bit later, and see if I can deduce precisely what the mods are intended to accomplish and how the console looks w/o it. I agree it would be great to be able to remove it from the repo. w/o looking... - COUNTEROP and STREAMSCOPE are the little gray squares that show up

Re: maven: appended-resources/licenses

Thanks Justin, I should clarify one thing… > On Oct 3, 2017, at 10:56 PM, Justin Mclean wrote: > ... >> I believe NOTICE must include info for all bundled content (regardless of >> license type). > > Not exactly and a few things need to go in NOTICE and it almost

Re: maven: d3.legend.js mods

Hi Dale, Having another look at the code and the running example, it seems as if this conditionally sets the width of something depending on the title. I did have a look at the running application and for me the application seems to work nicely. Chris Am 03.10.17, 23:45 schrieb "Dale

Re: maven: d3.legend.js mods

Oh yeah … I remember seeing that difference. I guess it would probably be the best option to modify the rest of the application to work with the d3.legend.js instead of patching the library to work with our application. This way we could keep the MIT code out of our repo, which is a rather

Re: maven: appended-resources/licenses

Hi all, So, I did another slack-session with Justin and updated the build again. I reduced the number of licensed included in the bundle to the ones needed. I also removed the generation of the DEPENDENCIES file, as this was the only reason for using all of these “optional=true” dependencies