Really is it so bad to say to a project with a bug in their license and
notice info:
fix this in trunk and show me the revision and I'll go ahead and approve your
release as-is.
Running through iterations of this is very labor-intensive for the project,
and
anything we can do to cut down
: Re: [DISCUSS] Expressing priorities about release reviews
On 1/14/13 9:20 AM, Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com
wrote:
The thing is Alex, all of this effort
to dot our i's and cross our t's on the legal
issues really is only for the benefit
of major corporations who want
...@yahoo.com; general@incubator.apache.org
general@incubator.apache.org
Cc:
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2013 12:46 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Expressing priorities about release reviews
On 1/14/13 9:20 AM, Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com
wrote:
The thing is Alex, all of this effort
...@yahoo.com
Sent: Monday, January 14, 2013 12:15 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Expressing priorities about release reviews
On 1/14/13 7:01 AM, Chen, Pei pei.c...@childrens.harvard.edu wrote:
Really is it so bad to say to a project with a bug in their license and
notice info:
fix
releases is IMO worthwhile.
From: Sergio Fernández sergio.fernan...@salzburgresearch.at
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Cc: Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com
Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2013 2:22 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Expressing priorities about release
On 13/01/13 12:45, Benson Margulies wrote:
...
3. Most of the reviewing in this area is done by sebb. We're lucky to
have him paying attention to this at all, because it sure seems
sometimes as if no one else does.
Adding all of this up, I've got a very modest proposal. Let's create a
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 4:45 AM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com wrote:
1. Why are podlings having so much trouble getting the legal metadata
correct?
* Our documentation on legal metadata is ill-organized, voluminous, and
ultimately overwhelming.
* The NOTICE construct is
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 12:51 PM, Marvin Humphrey
mar...@rectangular.com wrote:
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 4:45 AM, Benson Margulies bimargul...@gmail.com
wrote:
1. Why are podlings having so much trouble getting the legal metadata
correct?
* Our documentation on legal metadata is
We can also add a checklist item to the top level checklists, to be
done as part of the source migration:
Add LICENSE and NOTICE files to the top level repository directory. [I
don't know if there is anything more specific than that, because where
a project is using project/trunk,
There have been many opinions expressed over the last few years about
what constitutes a release. At least one opinion was that having the
source in SCM that is freely available constitutes release and
therefore best practice is to mark the source directory with the
appropriate source
On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 5:34 PM, Craig L Russell
craig.russ...@oracle.com wrote:
There have been many opinions expressed over the last few years about what
constitutes a release. At least one opinion was that having the source in
SCM that is freely available constitutes release and therefore
On Sat, Jan 12, 2013 at 9:07 AM, Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote:
Just think about this for a second, what's more
likely for people to start suing us over, some
bug in the NOTICE file or an undetected backdoor
in one of our programs? I am personally far more
concerned about the
One of my long time pet peeves with how we
PMC members participate in vetting releases
is our penchant for focusing too much on the
policies surrounding license and notice info.
I really think our exclusive focus on things
that really don't pose any organizational risk
to either the org nor the
I agree with you on this Joe. A lot of times my metric is more
responsiveness and participation than in legal/language intricacies. More
power to folks who are good at that, it's just not me.
Cheers,
Chris
On 1/12/13 9:07 AM, Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote:
One of my long time pet
priorities about release reviews
I agree with you on this Joe. A lot of times my metric is more
responsiveness and participation than in legal/language intricacies. More
power to folks who are good at that, it's just not me.
Cheers,
Chris
On 1/12/13 9:07 AM, Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com wrote
joe_schae...@yahoo.com
Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2013 12:30 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Expressing priorities about release reviews
I agree with you on this Joe. A lot of times my metric is more
responsiveness and participation than in legal/language intricacies. More
power to folks who are good
: Mattmann, Chris A (388J) chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov
To: general@incubator.apache.org general@incubator.apache.org; Joe
Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com
Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2013 12:44 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Expressing priorities about release reviews
Totally agree, Joe.
Cheers
Joe,
personally I appreciate such policies checking from the IPMC members.
The technical quality of a release is responsibility of the project
itself, which could be hard to be evaluated by people working on other
topics. Therefore, all additional checkpoints are useful and grateful.
is IMO worthwhile.
From: Sergio Fernández sergio.fernan...@salzburgresearch.at
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Cc: Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com
Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2013 2:22 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Expressing priorities about release reviews
] Expressing priorities about release reviews
Joe,
personally I appreciate such policies checking from the IPMC members. The
technical quality of a release is responsibility of the project itself,
which could be hard to be evaluated by people working on other topics.
Therefore, all additional
@incubator.apache.org
Cc: Joe Schaefer joe_schae...@yahoo.com
Sent: Saturday, January 12, 2013 2:22 PM
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Expressing priorities about release reviews
Joe,
personally I appreciate such policies checking from the IPMC
members. The technical quality of a release
21 matches
Mail list logo
