On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 1:53 PM, Stefano Bagnara <[email protected]> wrote: > Well, I just noticed that the license.txt content are just the "MIT > license" repeated twice (for 2 different copyright holders). > MIT license is a category A and I guess we are safe with it. > > Does this answer Robert concerns?
My major concern is that there is no public license for the artifact in Maven central. A clean fork, review of the IP and release of a new artifact would probably work. To avoid potential legal complications for release managers, I'm going to comment out the plugin until we find a resolution. Robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
