Hi Xiangdong,
that sounds reasonable to me (that’s what minor releases are for).
So if cherry-pick the fix and voluinteer as RM I think it’s a good move to do
so!
Julian
Am 20.11.19, 08:51 schrieb "Xiangdong Huang" :
Hi,
Some users report the bug of IoTDB-264, which has been
Hi,
Some users report the bug of IoTDB-264, which has been fixed in 0.9.0 (not
released now). It is a critical bug and it is very easy to trigger the bug
(if users define time series A's data type as INT, but they write into the
time series a float data).
However, these users are using 0.8.1 and
Hi,
> Given that I wrote every line of that code, I'm allowed to stick whatever
> header I want on it.
Are you 100% sure about that for this version of the file? if it was copied
from here [1] and it’s the latest then there are 4 contributors to that file
over 20 odd commits.
Thanks,
Justin
Hi Justin,
Given that I wrote every line of that code, I'm allowed to stick whatever
header I want on it.
Please let me be clear: I'm only talking about the Java file.
Chris
Am 19.11.19, 10:57 schrieb "Justin Mclean" :
Hi,
Given the priject is not an ASF one why would it have
Hi,
Given the priject is not an ASF one why would it have an ASF header?
Thanks,
Justin
On Tue, 19 Nov 2019, 19:52 Christofer Dutz,
wrote:
> Hi Justin,
>
> this is a file I personally wrote and submitted to the maven-wrapper
> project.
> So technically it could have the Apache header ...
Hi Chris,
So, sounds that we need to remove the declaration in the LICENSE file?
```
The following class is modified from Maven Wrapper, which is under Apache
License 2.0:
./.mvn/wrapper/MavenWrapperDownloader.java
```
Best,
---
Xiangdong Huang
School of
Hi Justin,
this is a file I personally wrote and submitted to the maven-wrapper project.
So technically it could have the Apache header ... after all, I put it there.
So I think the Apache header doesn't have to be replaced.
Chris
Am 18.11.19, 21:21 schrieb "Justin Mclean" :
HI,
