On Oct 17, 2007, at 10:49 PM, Lin Sun wrote:
Hi Kevan, I've marked G3309 as resolved. I documented my analysis
in the latest few comments I added in the JIRA. If there is
anything else that is missing from a legal point of view, please
let me know.
Hi Lin,
That's great. Thanks for
Hi Kevan,
Thanks for the feedback! I have addressed your comment No. 1 below in
rev 586078.
For No.2, I added dom4j, pull-parser and jaxen in the notice.txt. I
also added notice for commons-logging. I don't see a notice file for
commons-el, jasper-runtime, jasper-compiler, or
Hi Kevan, I've marked G3309 as resolved. I documented my analysis in
the latest few comments I added in the JIRA. If there is anything else
that is missing from a legal point of view, please let me know.
Thanks,
Lin
Kevan Miller wrote:
On Oct 12, 2007, at 1:55 PM, Jason Warner wrote:
Kevan, I'll look at it. I agree the license issues should be fixed
before we release j2g 1.0.
Lin
Kevan Miller wrote:
On Oct 12, 2007, at 1:55 PM, Jason Warner wrote:
Donald,
I'm still unsure of the status of the license files for J2G. If we
can get a confirmation that those are ok,
David,
I'm not actually familiar with that plugin at all. Would you mind providing
a sentence or two breaking it down?
Thanks,
Jason Warner
On 10/12/07, David Jencks [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Oct 12, 2007, at 11:22 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
On Oct 12, 2007, at 1:55 PM, Jason Warner
David,
Nevermind. It was early and I was being slow.
On 10/13/07, Jason Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
David,
I'm not actually familiar with that plugin at all. Would you mind
providing a sentence or two breaking it down?
Thanks,
Jason Warner
On 10/12/07, David Jencks [EMAIL
It all seems pretty good to me - the only hangup being if there were still
compile/version issue relating to the change to the full Eclipse 3.3 release
from the RC2 that it was pulling at compile time, which has been taken care
of.
Other than that, I've got nothing currently.
David - Chiming in
On Oct 12, 2007, at 1:55 PM, Jason Warner wrote:
Donald,
I'm still unsure of the status of the license files for J2G. If we
can get a confirmation that those are ok, then I'm all for
releasing a 1.0.0. Otherwise, I think we should hold off.
Right. They aren't ok. And must be fixed
On Oct 12, 2007, at 1:55 PM, Jason Warner wrote:
Donald,
I'm still unsure of the status of the license files for J2G. If we
can get a confirmation that those are ok, then I'm all for
releasing a 1.0.0. Otherwise, I think we should hold off.
By the way, the patches seem to be missing a
Are there are any major items that we want to get into a J2G 1.0.0
release, or is everyone ready to create a branch and start the release
process?
-Donald
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
On Oct 12, 2007, at 11:22 AM, Kevan Miller wrote:
On Oct 12, 2007, at 1:55 PM, Jason Warner wrote:
Donald,
I'm still unsure of the status of the license files for J2G. If
we can get a confirmation that those are ok, then I'm all for
releasing a 1.0.0. Otherwise, I think we should
Donald,
I'm still unsure of the status of the license files for J2G. If we can get
a confirmation that those are ok, then I'm all for releasing a 1.0.0.
Otherwise, I think we should hold off.
~ Jason Warner
On 10/11/07, Donald Woods [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are there are any major items that
12 matches
Mail list logo
