You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@aries.apache.org by Emily Jiang <em...@googlemail.com> on 2011/02/03 22:36:18 UTC
License is incomplete in three files of blog itests
Just noticed there are three files in blog itests with the incomplete
license. The license reads:
/*
* or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file
* distributed with this work for additional information
* regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file
* to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
* "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
* with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
*
* http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
*
* Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
* software distributed under the License is distributed on an
* "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
* KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the
* specific language governing permissions and limitations
* under the License.
*/
As you can see the first line 'Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation
(ASF) under one' was missing:(.
Do we need to fix this before we start a vote for 0.3 release?
--
Thanks
Emily
=================
Emily Jiang
ejiang@apache.org
Re: License is incomplete in three files of blog itests
Posted by zoe slattery <zo...@gmail.com>.
On 04/02/2011 10:19, Emily Jiang wrote:
> Thanks Tim for your explaination. I got the wrong release number:(. Just
> wondering whether this is important enough to respin sample release 0.2.1?
Hi Emily - 0.2.1 was a release of the application component only and
does not contain the samples.
Z
>
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 8:10 AM, Timothy Ward<ti...@apache.org>wrote:
>
>> Hi Emily,
>>
>> That was for the 0.2.1 release of the application component.
>>
>> Tim
>>
>> ----------------------------------------
>>> Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 22:21:25 +0000
>>> Subject: Re: License is incomplete in three files of blog itests
>>> From: emijiang6@googlemail.com
>>> To: dev@aries.apache.org
>>>
>>> Thanks, Alasdair. I thought there will be a respin due to the copyright
>> year
>>> problem Tim mentioned:o.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:44 PM, Alasdair Nottingham wrote:
>>>
>>>> Err, well I think the vote on 0.3 passed so I guess no, but thanks for
>> the
>>>> fix so it'll be right next time.
>>>>
>>>> Alasdair Nottingham
>>>>
>>>> On 3 Feb 2011, at 21:36, Emily Jiang wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Just noticed there are three files in blog itests with the incomplete
>>>>> license. The license reads:
>>>>>
>>>>> /*
>>>>> * or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file
>>>>> * distributed with this work for additional information
>>>>> * regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file
>>>>> * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
>>>>> * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
>>>>> * with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
>>>>> *
>>>>> * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
>>>>> *
>>>>> * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
>>>>> * software distributed under the License is distributed on an
>>>>> * "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
>>>>> * KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the
>>>>> * specific language governing permissions and limitations
>>>>> * under the License.
>>>>> */
>>>>>
>>>>> As you can see the first line 'Licensed to the Apache Software
>> Foundation
>>>>> (ASF) under one' was missing:(.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do we need to fix this before we start a vote for 0.3 release?
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> Emily
>>>>> =================
>>>>> Emily Jiang
>>>>> ejiang@apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thanks
>>> Emily
>>> =================
>>> Emily Jiang
>>> ejiang@apache.org
>>
>
>
Re: License is incomplete in three files of blog itests
Posted by Alasdair Nottingham <no...@apache.org>.
If the problem existed in 0.2, and 0.3 I would say no, also isnt thr the 0.2.1 release just the application module? If so there is nothing to respin.
Alasdair Nottingham
On 4 Feb 2011, at 10:19, Emily Jiang <em...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Thanks Tim for your explaination. I got the wrong release number:(. Just
> wondering whether this is important enough to respin sample release 0.2.1?
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 8:10 AM, Timothy Ward <ti...@apache.org>wrote:
>
>>
>> Hi Emily,
>>
>> That was for the 0.2.1 release of the application component.
>>
>> Tim
>>
>> ----------------------------------------
>>> Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 22:21:25 +0000
>>> Subject: Re: License is incomplete in three files of blog itests
>>> From: emijiang6@googlemail.com
>>> To: dev@aries.apache.org
>>>
>>> Thanks, Alasdair. I thought there will be a respin due to the copyright
>> year
>>> problem Tim mentioned:o.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:44 PM, Alasdair Nottingham wrote:
>>>
>>>> Err, well I think the vote on 0.3 passed so I guess no, but thanks for
>> the
>>>> fix so it'll be right next time.
>>>>
>>>> Alasdair Nottingham
>>>>
>>>> On 3 Feb 2011, at 21:36, Emily Jiang wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Just noticed there are three files in blog itests with the incomplete
>>>>> license. The license reads:
>>>>>
>>>>> /*
>>>>> * or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file
>>>>> * distributed with this work for additional information
>>>>> * regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file
>>>>> * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
>>>>> * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
>>>>> * with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
>>>>> *
>>>>> * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
>>>>> *
>>>>> * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
>>>>> * software distributed under the License is distributed on an
>>>>> * "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
>>>>> * KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the
>>>>> * specific language governing permissions and limitations
>>>>> * under the License.
>>>>> */
>>>>>
>>>>> As you can see the first line 'Licensed to the Apache Software
>> Foundation
>>>>> (ASF) under one' was missing:(.
>>>>>
>>>>> Do we need to fix this before we start a vote for 0.3 release?
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Thanks
>>>>> Emily
>>>>> =================
>>>>> Emily Jiang
>>>>> ejiang@apache.org
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thanks
>>> Emily
>>> =================
>>> Emily Jiang
>>> ejiang@apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks
> Emily
> =================
> Emily Jiang
> ejiang@apache.org
Re: License is incomplete in three files of blog itests
Posted by Emily Jiang <em...@googlemail.com>.
Thanks Tim for your explaination. I got the wrong release number:(. Just
wondering whether this is important enough to respin sample release 0.2.1?
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 8:10 AM, Timothy Ward <ti...@apache.org>wrote:
>
> Hi Emily,
>
> That was for the 0.2.1 release of the application component.
>
> Tim
>
> ----------------------------------------
> > Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 22:21:25 +0000
> > Subject: Re: License is incomplete in three files of blog itests
> > From: emijiang6@googlemail.com
> > To: dev@aries.apache.org
> >
> > Thanks, Alasdair. I thought there will be a respin due to the copyright
> year
> > problem Tim mentioned:o.
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:44 PM, Alasdair Nottingham wrote:
> >
> > > Err, well I think the vote on 0.3 passed so I guess no, but thanks for
> the
> > > fix so it'll be right next time.
> > >
> > > Alasdair Nottingham
> > >
> > > On 3 Feb 2011, at 21:36, Emily Jiang wrote:
> > >
> > > > Just noticed there are three files in blog itests with the incomplete
> > > > license. The license reads:
> > > >
> > > > /*
> > > > * or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file
> > > > * distributed with this work for additional information
> > > > * regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file
> > > > * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
> > > > * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
> > > > * with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
> > > > *
> > > > * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
> > > > *
> > > > * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
> > > > * software distributed under the License is distributed on an
> > > > * "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
> > > > * KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the
> > > > * specific language governing permissions and limitations
> > > > * under the License.
> > > > */
> > > >
> > > > As you can see the first line 'Licensed to the Apache Software
> Foundation
> > > > (ASF) under one' was missing:(.
> > > >
> > > > Do we need to fix this before we start a vote for 0.3 release?
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Thanks
> > > > Emily
> > > > =================
> > > > Emily Jiang
> > > > ejiang@apache.org
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Thanks
> > Emily
> > =================
> > Emily Jiang
> > ejiang@apache.org
>
>
--
Thanks
Emily
=================
Emily Jiang
ejiang@apache.org
RE: License is incomplete in three files of blog itests
Posted by Timothy Ward <ti...@apache.org>.
Hi Emily,
That was for the 0.2.1 release of the application component.
Tim
----------------------------------------
> Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2011 22:21:25 +0000
> Subject: Re: License is incomplete in three files of blog itests
> From: emijiang6@googlemail.com
> To: dev@aries.apache.org
>
> Thanks, Alasdair. I thought there will be a respin due to the copyright year
> problem Tim mentioned:o.
>
> On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:44 PM, Alasdair Nottingham wrote:
>
> > Err, well I think the vote on 0.3 passed so I guess no, but thanks for the
> > fix so it'll be right next time.
> >
> > Alasdair Nottingham
> >
> > On 3 Feb 2011, at 21:36, Emily Jiang wrote:
> >
> > > Just noticed there are three files in blog itests with the incomplete
> > > license. The license reads:
> > >
> > > /*
> > > * or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file
> > > * distributed with this work for additional information
> > > * regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file
> > > * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
> > > * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
> > > * with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
> > > *
> > > * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
> > > *
> > > * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
> > > * software distributed under the License is distributed on an
> > > * "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
> > > * KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the
> > > * specific language governing permissions and limitations
> > > * under the License.
> > > */
> > >
> > > As you can see the first line 'Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation
> > > (ASF) under one' was missing:(.
> > >
> > > Do we need to fix this before we start a vote for 0.3 release?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Thanks
> > > Emily
> > > =================
> > > Emily Jiang
> > > ejiang@apache.org
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks
> Emily
> =================
> Emily Jiang
> ejiang@apache.org
Re: License is incomplete in three files of blog itests
Posted by Emily Jiang <em...@googlemail.com>.
Thanks, Alasdair. I thought there will be a respin due to the copyright year
problem Tim mentioned:o.
On Thu, Feb 3, 2011 at 9:44 PM, Alasdair Nottingham <no...@apache.org> wrote:
> Err, well I think the vote on 0.3 passed so I guess no, but thanks for the
> fix so it'll be right next time.
>
> Alasdair Nottingham
>
> On 3 Feb 2011, at 21:36, Emily Jiang <em...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
> > Just noticed there are three files in blog itests with the incomplete
> > license. The license reads:
> >
> > /*
> > * or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file
> > * distributed with this work for additional information
> > * regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file
> > * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
> > * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
> > * with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
> > *
> > * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
> > *
> > * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
> > * software distributed under the License is distributed on an
> > * "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
> > * KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the
> > * specific language governing permissions and limitations
> > * under the License.
> > */
> >
> > As you can see the first line 'Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation
> > (ASF) under one' was missing:(.
> >
> > Do we need to fix this before we start a vote for 0.3 release?
> >
> > --
> > Thanks
> > Emily
> > =================
> > Emily Jiang
> > ejiang@apache.org
>
--
Thanks
Emily
=================
Emily Jiang
ejiang@apache.org
Re: License is incomplete in three files of blog itests
Posted by Alasdair Nottingham <no...@apache.org>.
Err, well I think the vote on 0.3 passed so I guess no, but thanks for the fix so it'll be right next time.
Alasdair Nottingham
On 3 Feb 2011, at 21:36, Emily Jiang <em...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Just noticed there are three files in blog itests with the incomplete
> license. The license reads:
>
> /*
> * or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file
> * distributed with this work for additional information
> * regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file
> * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
> * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
> * with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
> *
> * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
> *
> * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
> * software distributed under the License is distributed on an
> * "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
> * KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the
> * specific language governing permissions and limitations
> * under the License.
> */
>
> As you can see the first line 'Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation
> (ASF) under one' was missing:(.
>
> Do we need to fix this before we start a vote for 0.3 release?
>
> --
> Thanks
> Emily
> =================
> Emily Jiang
> ejiang@apache.org
Re: License is incomplete in three files of blog itests
Posted by Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org>.
On 4 February 2011 14:01, Emily Jiang <em...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Hi Jeremy,
>
> Further to your suggestion, I took this up with RAT dev and was told that
> RAT at the moment only validates either license text or license URL for some
> reason. If either of them is valid, it will pass validation. That explains
> why you did not get a validation error. I have raised a jira RAT-82 for them
> to tighten up the validation.
Thanks. I'll got and vote for it :-)
>
> Thanks
> Emily
>
> On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 11:11 AM, Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> On 3 February 2011 21:36, Emily Jiang <em...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> > Just noticed there are three files in blog itests with the incomplete
>> > license. The license reads:
>> >
>> > /*
>> > * or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file
>> > * distributed with this work for additional information
>> > * regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file
>> > * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
>> > * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
>> > * with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
>> > *
>> > * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
>> > *
>> > * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
>> > * software distributed under the License is distributed on an
>> > * "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
>> > * KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the
>> > * specific language governing permissions and limitations
>> > * under the License.
>> > */
>> >
>> > As you can see the first line 'Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation
>> > (ASF) under one' was missing:(.
>>
>> What's worrying is that RAT doesn't pick this up. I just tried a mvn
>> -Prat in the blog-itests dir and it didn't complain. We're using RAT
>> 0.6 and not the latest which is 0.7.....
>>
>> Just tried 0.7 and that didn't complain either. Would you be able to
>> discuss on the rat list or open a JIRA. They're at
>> http://incubator.apache.org/rat
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> >
>> > Do we need to fix this before we start a vote for 0.3 release?
>> >
>> > --
>> > Thanks
>> > Emily
>> > =================
>> > Emily Jiang
>> > ejiang@apache.org
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Thanks
> Emily
> =================
> Emily Jiang
> ejiang@apache.org
>
Re: License is incomplete in three files of blog itests
Posted by Emily Jiang <em...@googlemail.com>.
Hi Jeremy,
Further to your suggestion, I took this up with RAT dev and was told that
RAT at the moment only validates either license text or license URL for some
reason. If either of them is valid, it will pass validation. That explains
why you did not get a validation error. I have raised a jira RAT-82 for them
to tighten up the validation.
Thanks
Emily
On Fri, Feb 4, 2011 at 11:11 AM, Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 3 February 2011 21:36, Emily Jiang <em...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> > Just noticed there are three files in blog itests with the incomplete
> > license. The license reads:
> >
> > /*
> > * or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file
> > * distributed with this work for additional information
> > * regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file
> > * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
> > * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
> > * with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
> > *
> > * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
> > *
> > * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
> > * software distributed under the License is distributed on an
> > * "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
> > * KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the
> > * specific language governing permissions and limitations
> > * under the License.
> > */
> >
> > As you can see the first line 'Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation
> > (ASF) under one' was missing:(.
>
> What's worrying is that RAT doesn't pick this up. I just tried a mvn
> -Prat in the blog-itests dir and it didn't complain. We're using RAT
> 0.6 and not the latest which is 0.7.....
>
> Just tried 0.7 and that didn't complain either. Would you be able to
> discuss on the rat list or open a JIRA. They're at
> http://incubator.apache.org/rat
>
> Thanks.
>
> >
> > Do we need to fix this before we start a vote for 0.3 release?
> >
> > --
> > Thanks
> > Emily
> > =================
> > Emily Jiang
> > ejiang@apache.org
> >
>
--
Thanks
Emily
=================
Emily Jiang
ejiang@apache.org
Re: License is incomplete in three files of blog itests
Posted by Jeremy Hughes <hu...@apache.org>.
On 3 February 2011 21:36, Emily Jiang <em...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> Just noticed there are three files in blog itests with the incomplete
> license. The license reads:
>
> /*
> * or more contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file
> * distributed with this work for additional information
> * regarding copyright ownership. The ASF licenses this file
> * to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
> * "License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
> * with the License. You may obtain a copy of the License at
> *
> * http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
> *
> * Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
> * software distributed under the License is distributed on an
> * "AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
> * KIND, either express or implied. See the License for the
> * specific language governing permissions and limitations
> * under the License.
> */
>
> As you can see the first line 'Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation
> (ASF) under one' was missing:(.
What's worrying is that RAT doesn't pick this up. I just tried a mvn
-Prat in the blog-itests dir and it didn't complain. We're using RAT
0.6 and not the latest which is 0.7.....
Just tried 0.7 and that didn't complain either. Would you be able to
discuss on the rat list or open a JIRA. They're at
http://incubator.apache.org/rat
Thanks.
>
> Do we need to fix this before we start a vote for 0.3 release?
>
> --
> Thanks
> Emily
> =================
> Emily Jiang
> ejiang@apache.org
>