On Jul 29, 2006, at 7:30 PM, Sean Schofield wrote:
Is Shale a sourceforge project?
http://sourceforge.net/projects/shale
Looks like a graphical file mgr for Linux :-) And it appears to be
orphaned. At least there's nothing there.
Greg
I was also going to suggest just shipping this one as source. We will
have to exclude the the incompatibly licensed dependencies from the
default build, which means 'mvn install' would still build a war that
doesn't work. (Back to that 'reading the directions' thing again. :)
). But 'mvn
Why is CDDL an issue? That was on Cliff's list of acceptable licenses.
I wasn't sure which licenses were cool and which weren't.
Google also just announced that they're going to do hosting of open source
prrojects[1]. They are in the early days (don't even have infrastructure in
place for
They will land in the top directory of the artifact. That's how we
do it for the struts1 stuff now.
--
James Mitchell
On Jul 23, 2006, at 8:02 PM, Craig McClanahan wrote:
On 7/23/06, James Mitchell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I like to keep them (LICENSE.txt and NOTICE.txt) under:
I like to keep them (LICENSE.txt and NOTICE.txt) under:
${project}/src/main/resources
... so that they will, by default, make it into the package (jar/war/
whatever) without requiring any special copying or resource inclusions.
--
James Mitchell
On Jul 20, 2006, at 7:33 PM, Greg
+1 for framework
--
James Mitchell
On Jul 18, 2006, at 12:19 AM, Craig McClanahan wrote:
On 7/17/06, Wendy Smoak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/16/06, Craig McClanahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Before doing so, it's probably worth spending some time figuring
out how
we
want the
I like that organization. Keep it as simple as possible and expand
on it if needed.
Greg
On Jul 17, 2006, at 10:11 PM, Wendy Smoak wrote:
On 7/16/06, Craig McClanahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Before doing so, it's probably worth spending some time figuring
out how we
want the source
