Robert Burrell Donkin ha scritto:
looks good
only possible issue are those PITA poms without license headers in the
stage directory :-/
IIRC the issue has been raised [1] in legal-discuss and in repository
lists but we had no solution to the fact that most poms in the maven
repository have no license headers.
For jSieve you found that we had false dependencies and worked out a
good solution that allowed us to remove the whole stage folder (that I
repeat we simply introduced to satisfy a request by Noel to not use
remote repositories to retrieve dependencies during a build). I'm not
sure this can be done for jSPF.
I can raise the issue again on legal discuss but I don't think it is
good to stop releasing because of this issue while all of other PMC are
releasing. Given the current answers we have on the topic I'm not even
sure that the jSieve solution is ok: is it ok for an ASF product to
require remote inclusion of artifacts (POM/metadata) under an unknown
license?
Either the ASF board take a position on the maven repository poms/xmls
or IMHO we can *temporarily* ignore the issue as everyone else is doing.
Maybe you, Noel, Danny or other more experienced ASF members are more
entitled in understanding the entity of this issue and ask the Board to
take this issue into consideration and give us an answer about what to do.
Stefano
[1]
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/200710.mbox/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[2]
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg15788.html
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg15805.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
