No, it is not up to the ASF. However, has the ASF attempted to clarify the
matter with the FSF? Why not ask the FSF if importing java classes is
considered as derivative work or simply as work that uses the library?
It doesn't really matter. There are restrictions imposed on a 'work that
-Original Message-
From: Martin Poeschl [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 9:44 PM
To: Jakarta General List
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Maven as a top-level apache project]
Steve Downey wrote:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED
-Original Message-
From: news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On Behalf Of Dan Diephouse
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 9:52 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Maven as a top-level apache project]
It is your responsibility to enforce that policy. Not maven and not the
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Jakarta General List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2003 8:07 PM
Subject: Re: [Fwd: Maven as a top-level apache project]
BTW, given the license discussions it seems unlikely a solution that
includes all the jars in the same place will work. So the
http://infoworld.com/articles/hn/xml/02/10/29/021029hnjavajcp.xml
quote
JCP open-source upgrade released
By Paul Krill
October 29, 2002 7:36 am PT
THE JCP PROGRAM Management Office on Tuesday is launching a new version of its
Java Community Process program, to be called JCP 2.5, which embraces
LGPL probably isn't bad enough to prevent people from using it. So the drive
to create a BSD or Apache-style implementation hasn't exceeded the effort.
On Friday 25 October 2002 08:16 pm, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
But JBoss is. JBoss support EJB but has some features as a general app
server
On Friday 25 October 2002 08:30 pm, Jon Scott Stevens wrote:
on 2002/10/25 5:16 PM, Andrew C. Oliver [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wish we did have something that supported a non-crappy interface like
EOB (eob.sourceforge.net)
Stuff like this reminds me of Velocity vs. JSP argument.
People
On Sunday 20 October 2002 02:03 pm, Andrew C. Oliver wrote:
Release more often, announce the releases. While you may have had
articles published, I've never actually seen one. (I've seen them on
Maven, Tomcat, Velocity, Struts to no end, Cocoon, Struts). I found the
best approach to this is
himself.
Of course for project validty, it may be better to have a non-prinicipal
contribute (if I write about POI it will not likely be viewed as
objective but someone who has written about other APIs will probably get
more credibility there), but that is another story.
Steve Downey wrote
person, every nail
looks like a thumb. Or something like that.
===
tom
-Original Message-
From: Steve Downey [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, October 09, 2002 8:52 PM
To: Jakarta General List
Subject: Re: Differences between Structs and Turbine ???
On Wednesday 09
On Wednesday 09 October 2002 07:18 pm, Pier Fumagalli wrote:
On 9/10/02 3:47, Berin Loritsch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Even when Quick and Dirty takes longer. I tried to convince my boss that
a certain customization required so many fundamental changes that it
would be quicker and easier
That is just evil. It reminds me of the hacks for browser detection. And is as
reliable.
The 'right' way to do it is with System properties. You might need to query a
few to get at what you're looking for, though.
The on point ones are:
java.specification.version
java.vendor
java.version
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Thursday, March 14, 2002 12:07 PM
To: Jakarta General List
Subject: Re: License issue (the come back)
snip /
Please, not another standard body !!!
Could someone check the definition of 'standard'
From http://java.sun.com/j2ee/j2ee-1_3-fr-spec.pdf, the latest J2EE
specification.
Sun hereby grants you a fully-paid, non-exclusive, non-transferable,
worldwide, limited license (without the
right to sublicense), under Sun's intellectual property rights that are
essential to practice the
If you are _very_ lucky, the object is coarse grained enough, and has loose
enough performance requirements, that the rest of the system can tolerate
that calls to it will take 100 to 1000 times longer.
I've never seen any system that lucky.
Most objects don't work if they are made
A 10,000 node linux cluster. http://www.google.com/press/highlights.html
-Original Message-
From: Alef Arendsen [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2002 10:58 AM
To: Jakarta General List
Subject: RE: [OT] RE: J2EE considered harmful
As far as I can remember
snip
I have implemented a system using Container Managed EntityBeans that
worked fairly well. I used Jonas (it was some time ago). It
was smaller
than the original poster example (about 20 entity classes, tens of
thousands of instances). I spent a lot of time getting the
entity
-Original Message-
From: Peter Donald [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Saturday, January 05, 2002 9:53 PM
To: Jakarta General List
Subject: Re: More abuse of coding styles...
On Sun, 6 Jan 2002 11:26, Steve Downey wrote:
Your javac has a configuration setting for the class
While MS does a lot of things wrong, this isn't one of them. The $1000 fee
is for a business to use Microsoft's .Net My Services, their web services,
not for doing .NET development.
-Original Message-
From: Jon Stevens [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2001 5:41
Tomcat 3.2.1 is the most current released version.
Tomcat 3.2.2 beta 5 is the next version to be released on this code base.
Tomcat 3.2 is in bug fix only mode.
Tomcat 3.3 is in new work mode, and is also an implementation of servlet
2.2/jsp 1.1. It is a substantially refactored code base from
Better would be to figure out how to do the right thing. The URI associated
with a DTD is not a locator, it's a namespace. It distinguishes this DTD
from all others. The parser should be able to resolve the DTD locally. After
all, the internet makes a really poor filesystem. The fact that
Jon Wrote:
Additional: the issues surrounding logging and pluggable logging
implementations are not covered here. I think they have the same importance
as configuration. My vote is that we standardize on simply using Log4J and
its interfaces for *everything*.
+1
Two logging mechanisms is
Jon, have you actually used JUnit?
I have. It's an integral part of the project I'm working on. It's a
wonderful lightweight, code-centric, unit test framework.
It's also, very deliberately, code centric, small scale, and focused on
testing single classes with little to no state tracking or
23 matches
Mail list logo
