You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@geronimo.apache.org by Ivan <xh...@gmail.com> on 2010/04/28 12:30:49 UTC
[VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat
Please vote for Geronimo Customized Tomcat 7.0.0.0
Vote will be open for 72 hours.
[ ] +1 approve
[ ] +0 no opinion
[ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
Staging repo:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-030/<https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-027/>
Source repo:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/external/tags/tomcat-parent-7.0.0.0/
--
I have run the servlet TCK, at least, it does not bring new failures.
I paste svn log to show the Tomcat revision :
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r938833 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 17:13:40 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1 line
[maven-release-plugin] prepare for next development iteration
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r938831 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 17:12:51 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1 line
[maven-release-plugin] prepare release tomcat-parent-7.0.0.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r938824 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 17:00:58 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1 line
Merge Tomcat r938814 to fix the ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r938801 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:52:22 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1 line
Revert the changes due to key verification error
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r938794 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:11:44 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1 line
[maven-release-plugin] prepare for next development iteration
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r938792 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:11:19 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1 line
[maven-release-plugin] prepare release tomcat-parent-7.0.0.0
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r938790 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:01:21 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1 line
Fix an ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException exception
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r938375 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 17:33:06 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1 line
Merge r938373 from Tomcat trunk
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r938331 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 14:52:17 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1 line
Not sure why those configurations are missed while copying them from
tomcat-archetype...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r938306 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 11:14:03 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1 line
Use the released spec versions
------------------------------------------------------------------------
r938303 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 10:53:48 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1 line
GERONIMO-4980 new tomcat snapshot at rev 938302
Thanks
Ivan
Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat
Posted by Ivan <xh...@gmail.com>.
OK ......
Thanks for clarifying it. If those classes are used for annotation scanning,
we would be lucky, as Geronimo almost takes most of the annotation scanning
work. Will check how to remove those two classes.
2010/5/1 David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>
> After investigating the files in question there is no doubt in my mind that
> we have to cancel the vote. If someone from BCEL can demonstrate that they
> should be in apache svn, with an apache license, then we could proceed.
>
> We could also look into replacing the tomcat code with xbean-finder. IIUC
> it is used for annotation scanning, so maybe we could use our
> BundleAnnotationFinder.
>
> thanks
> david jencks
>
> On Apr 30, 2010, at 6:57 PM, Ivan wrote:
>
> Thanks for checking it, usually, I "hate" those license related issues ;-)
> Just find that Kevan has post a message in Tomcat community, so depending on
> the result there, we could decide whether we would continue or cancel this
> vote.
>
> 2010/5/1 David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>
>
>> Mark Thomas changed the license in rev 934219 on april 14 2010. That
>> change and rev 934220 seem to indicate that the tomcat community thinks
>> including EPL source in apache svn and releases is fine. The tomcat copies
>> are modified from the bcel "originals" including:
>>
>> - changing the package name (rev 887296, 887302) (this could be done with
>> maven-shade-plugin from binaries, were they to have been aleady released
>> which AFAICT they aren't)
>> - removing unused methods ( rev 887610, 887613)
>>
>> These seem to me to be functional modifications and so decidedly outside
>> the acceptable uses of CPL/EPL licensed source in apache.
>>
>> These files aren't in the latest bcel tag. As seen below the bcel source
>> has the CPL license. BCEL needs to fix this, right?
>>
>>
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jakarta/bcel/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/bcel/classfile/EnclosingMethod.java
>>
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jakarta/bcel/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/bcel/classfile/LocalVariableTypeTable.java
>>
>> I'm having some trouble interpreting bcel svn history but I think these
>> were added in rev 411580 as part of a GSOC project.
>>
>> david jencks
>>
>> On Apr 30, 2010, at 1:59 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
>>
>>
>> On Apr 30, 2010, at 3:10 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>>
>>
>> IIUC then I think we do need to fix this for the following reasons:
>>
>> 1) We are releasing these artifacts - even if they are copies of Tomcat
>> artifacts. The artifact is being released under the groupID
>> "org.apache.geronimo.ext.tomcat" and it is being released in source (not
>> just binary) form.
>>
>>
>> I agree with your general conclusion, but don't necessarily agree with how
>> you got there... :-). I definitely agree with your statement in 1).
>>
>>
>> 2) In addition to that, I can't see where Tomcat has actually ever
>> released these files - so it may be that we are "pre-releasing" them rather
>> than "re-releasing" them. I see a tag for Tomcat 7.0.0 RC1 but I don't see
>> any artifacts available yet on any repositories.
>>
>>
>> As far as I can tell, Tomcat never concluded their vote on 7.0.0. I would
>> assume the vote is cancelled. The issue of these two files was raised in
>> their vote. And the possibility of removing them was also suggested. More
>> below...
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>
>> On 4/30/10 1:10 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>>
>>
>> -1 (sorry)
>>
>>
>> There are some files with invalid license headers:
>>
>>
>> /util/src/main/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/bcel/classfile/EnclosingMethod.java
>>
>>
>>
>> /util/src/main/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/bcel/classfile/LocalVariableTypeTable.java
>>
>>
>> The license headers are not Apache source license headers. However, this
>> does not necessarily make them invalid source for an Apache release. The
>> files are not AL2 licensed. So, it makes sense that they would not contain
>> an Apache source license header. Apache releases can contain source files
>> that are licensed under a number of licenses that the ASF has determined to
>> be compatible with AL2. Here is a pretty good overview --
>> http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
>>
>> The source files in question were originally CPL Licensed. There's a
>> further comment that the ASF has elected to distribute the file under an EPL
>> license. I haven't looked to see when this "relicense" occurred, or if I
>> agree with it. For this discussion it's largely irrelevant. CPL and EPL are
>> equivalent for the purposes of this discussion.
>>
>> From the web site, you'll note that both CPL 1.0 and EPL 1.0 are Category
>> B licenses. As such, these files could not be included in an Apache *source*
>> release (they could be included in binary form), unless they fall into the
>> following exclusion:
>>
>> "For small amounts of source that is directly consumed by the ASF product
>> at runtime in source form, and for which that source is unlikely to be
>> changed anyway (say, by virtue of being specified by a standard), this
>> action is sufficient. An example of this is the web-facesconfig_1_0.dtd,
>> whose inclusion is mandated by the JSR 127: JavaServer Faces specification.
>>
>> Code that is more substantial, more volatile, or not directly consumed at
>> runtime in source form may only be distributed in binary form."
>>
>> My guess is that this code is unlikely to change, but probably still does
>> not fall under the above guidelines (e.g. AFAIK, it is "not directly
>> consumed at runtime in source form"). We could discuss this if others
>> disagree with this conclusion...
>>
>> One note: If the license for these files were instead BSD or any other
>> Category A license, they would be fine for an Apache release...
>>
>> --kevan
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Ivan
>
>
>
--
Ivan
Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
After investigating the files in question there is no doubt in my mind that we have to cancel the vote. If someone from BCEL can demonstrate that they should be in apache svn, with an apache license, then we could proceed.
We could also look into replacing the tomcat code with xbean-finder. IIUC it is used for annotation scanning, so maybe we could use our BundleAnnotationFinder.
thanks
david jencks
On Apr 30, 2010, at 6:57 PM, Ivan wrote:
> Thanks for checking it, usually, I "hate" those license related issues ;-) Just find that Kevan has post a message in Tomcat community, so depending on the result there, we could decide whether we would continue or cancel this vote.
>
> 2010/5/1 David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>
> Mark Thomas changed the license in rev 934219 on april 14 2010. That change and rev 934220 seem to indicate that the tomcat community thinks including EPL source in apache svn and releases is fine. The tomcat copies are modified from the bcel "originals" including:
>
> - changing the package name (rev 887296, 887302) (this could be done with maven-shade-plugin from binaries, were they to have been aleady released which AFAICT they aren't)
> - removing unused methods ( rev 887610, 887613)
>
> These seem to me to be functional modifications and so decidedly outside the acceptable uses of CPL/EPL licensed source in apache.
>
> These files aren't in the latest bcel tag. As seen below the bcel source has the CPL license. BCEL needs to fix this, right?
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jakarta/bcel/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/bcel/classfile/EnclosingMethod.java
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jakarta/bcel/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/bcel/classfile/LocalVariableTypeTable.java
>
> I'm having some trouble interpreting bcel svn history but I think these were added in rev 411580 as part of a GSOC project.
>
> david jencks
>
> On Apr 30, 2010, at 1:59 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
>
>>
>> On Apr 30, 2010, at 3:10 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> IIUC then I think we do need to fix this for the following reasons:
>>>
>>> 1) We are releasing these artifacts - even if they are copies of Tomcat artifacts. The artifact is being released under the groupID "org.apache.geronimo.ext.tomcat" and it is being released in source (not just binary) form.
>>
>> I agree with your general conclusion, but don't necessarily agree with how you got there... :-). I definitely agree with your statement in 1).
>>
>>>
>>> 2) In addition to that, I can't see where Tomcat has actually ever released these files - so it may be that we are "pre-releasing" them rather than "re-releasing" them. I see a tag for Tomcat 7.0.0 RC1 but I don't see any artifacts available yet on any repositories.
>>
>> As far as I can tell, Tomcat never concluded their vote on 7.0.0. I would assume the vote is cancelled. The issue of these two files was raised in their vote. And the possibility of removing them was also suggested. More below...
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>>
>>>> On 4/30/10 1:10 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> -1 (sorry)
>>>>>
>>>>> There are some files with invalid license headers:
>>>>> /util/src/main/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/bcel/classfile/EnclosingMethod.java
>>>>>
>>>>> /util/src/main/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/bcel/classfile/LocalVariableTypeTable.java
>>
>> The license headers are not Apache source license headers. However, this does not necessarily make them invalid source for an Apache release. The files are not AL2 licensed. So, it makes sense that they would not contain an Apache source license header. Apache releases can contain source files that are licensed under a number of licenses that the ASF has determined to be compatible with AL2. Here is a pretty good overview -- http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
>>
>> The source files in question were originally CPL Licensed. There's a further comment that the ASF has elected to distribute the file under an EPL license. I haven't looked to see when this "relicense" occurred, or if I agree with it. For this discussion it's largely irrelevant. CPL and EPL are equivalent for the purposes of this discussion.
>>
>> From the web site, you'll note that both CPL 1.0 and EPL 1.0 are Category B licenses. As such, these files could not be included in an Apache *source* release (they could be included in binary form), unless they fall into the following exclusion:
>>
>> "For small amounts of source that is directly consumed by the ASF product at runtime in source form, and for which that source is unlikely to be changed anyway (say, by virtue of being specified by a standard), this action is sufficient. An example of this is the web-facesconfig_1_0.dtd, whose inclusion is mandated by the JSR 127: JavaServer Faces specification.
>>
>> Code that is more substantial, more volatile, or not directly consumed at runtime in source form may only be distributed in binary form."
>>
>> My guess is that this code is unlikely to change, but probably still does not fall under the above guidelines (e.g. AFAIK, it is "not directly consumed at runtime in source form"). We could discuss this if others disagree with this conclusion...
>>
>> One note: If the license for these files were instead BSD or any other Category A license, they would be fine for an Apache release...
>>
>> --kevan
>>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Ivan
Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat
Posted by Ivan <xh...@gmail.com>.
Thanks for checking it, usually, I "hate" those license related issues ;-)
Just find that Kevan has post a message in Tomcat community, so depending on
the result there, we could decide whether we would continue or cancel this
vote.
2010/5/1 David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>
> Mark Thomas changed the license in rev 934219 on april 14 2010. That
> change and rev 934220 seem to indicate that the tomcat community thinks
> including EPL source in apache svn and releases is fine. The tomcat copies
> are modified from the bcel "originals" including:
>
> - changing the package name (rev 887296, 887302) (this could be done with
> maven-shade-plugin from binaries, were they to have been aleady released
> which AFAICT they aren't)
> - removing unused methods ( rev 887610, 887613)
>
> These seem to me to be functional modifications and so decidedly outside
> the acceptable uses of CPL/EPL licensed source in apache.
>
> These files aren't in the latest bcel tag. As seen below the bcel source
> has the CPL license. BCEL needs to fix this, right?
>
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jakarta/bcel/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/bcel/classfile/EnclosingMethod.java
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jakarta/bcel/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/bcel/classfile/LocalVariableTypeTable.java
>
> I'm having some trouble interpreting bcel svn history but I think these
> were added in rev 411580 as part of a GSOC project.
>
> david jencks
>
> On Apr 30, 2010, at 1:59 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
>
>
> On Apr 30, 2010, at 3:10 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>
>
> IIUC then I think we do need to fix this for the following reasons:
>
> 1) We are releasing these artifacts - even if they are copies of Tomcat
> artifacts. The artifact is being released under the groupID
> "org.apache.geronimo.ext.tomcat" and it is being released in source (not
> just binary) form.
>
>
> I agree with your general conclusion, but don't necessarily agree with how
> you got there... :-). I definitely agree with your statement in 1).
>
>
> 2) In addition to that, I can't see where Tomcat has actually ever released
> these files - so it may be that we are "pre-releasing" them rather than
> "re-releasing" them. I see a tag for Tomcat 7.0.0 RC1 but I don't see any
> artifacts available yet on any repositories.
>
>
> As far as I can tell, Tomcat never concluded their vote on 7.0.0. I would
> assume the vote is cancelled. The issue of these two files was raised in
> their vote. And the possibility of removing them was also suggested. More
> below...
>
> <snip>
>
>
> On 4/30/10 1:10 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>
>
> -1 (sorry)
>
>
> There are some files with invalid license headers:
>
>
> /util/src/main/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/bcel/classfile/EnclosingMethod.java
>
>
>
> /util/src/main/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/bcel/classfile/LocalVariableTypeTable.java
>
>
> The license headers are not Apache source license headers. However, this
> does not necessarily make them invalid source for an Apache release. The
> files are not AL2 licensed. So, it makes sense that they would not contain
> an Apache source license header. Apache releases can contain source files
> that are licensed under a number of licenses that the ASF has determined to
> be compatible with AL2. Here is a pretty good overview --
> http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
>
> The source files in question were originally CPL Licensed. There's a
> further comment that the ASF has elected to distribute the file under an EPL
> license. I haven't looked to see when this "relicense" occurred, or if I
> agree with it. For this discussion it's largely irrelevant. CPL and EPL are
> equivalent for the purposes of this discussion.
>
> From the web site, you'll note that both CPL 1.0 and EPL 1.0 are Category B
> licenses. As such, these files could not be included in an Apache *source*
> release (they could be included in binary form), unless they fall into the
> following exclusion:
>
> "For small amounts of source that is directly consumed by the ASF product
> at runtime in source form, and for which that source is unlikely to be
> changed anyway (say, by virtue of being specified by a standard), this
> action is sufficient. An example of this is the web-facesconfig_1_0.dtd,
> whose inclusion is mandated by the JSR 127: JavaServer Faces specification.
>
> Code that is more substantial, more volatile, or not directly consumed at
> runtime in source form may only be distributed in binary form."
>
> My guess is that this code is unlikely to change, but probably still does
> not fall under the above guidelines (e.g. AFAIK, it is "not directly
> consumed at runtime in source form"). We could discuss this if others
> disagree with this conclusion...
>
> One note: If the license for these files were instead BSD or any other
> Category A license, they would be fine for an Apache release...
>
> --kevan
>
>
>
--
Ivan
Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat
Posted by David Jencks <da...@yahoo.com>.
Mark Thomas changed the license in rev 934219 on april 14 2010. That change and rev 934220 seem to indicate that the tomcat community thinks including EPL source in apache svn and releases is fine. The tomcat copies are modified from the bcel "originals" including:
- changing the package name (rev 887296, 887302) (this could be done with maven-shade-plugin from binaries, were they to have been aleady released which AFAICT they aren't)
- removing unused methods ( rev 887610, 887613)
These seem to me to be functional modifications and so decidedly outside the acceptable uses of CPL/EPL licensed source in apache.
These files aren't in the latest bcel tag. As seen below the bcel source has the CPL license. BCEL needs to fix this, right?
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jakarta/bcel/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/bcel/classfile/EnclosingMethod.java
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jakarta/bcel/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/bcel/classfile/LocalVariableTypeTable.java
I'm having some trouble interpreting bcel svn history but I think these were added in rev 411580 as part of a GSOC project.
david jencks
On Apr 30, 2010, at 1:59 PM, Kevan Miller wrote:
>
> On Apr 30, 2010, at 3:10 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>
>>
>> IIUC then I think we do need to fix this for the following reasons:
>>
>> 1) We are releasing these artifacts - even if they are copies of Tomcat artifacts. The artifact is being released under the groupID "org.apache.geronimo.ext.tomcat" and it is being released in source (not just binary) form.
>
> I agree with your general conclusion, but don't necessarily agree with how you got there... :-). I definitely agree with your statement in 1).
>
>>
>> 2) In addition to that, I can't see where Tomcat has actually ever released these files - so it may be that we are "pre-releasing" them rather than "re-releasing" them. I see a tag for Tomcat 7.0.0 RC1 but I don't see any artifacts available yet on any repositories.
>
> As far as I can tell, Tomcat never concluded their vote on 7.0.0. I would assume the vote is cancelled. The issue of these two files was raised in their vote. And the possibility of removing them was also suggested. More below...
>
> <snip>
>
>>>
>>> On 4/30/10 1:10 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>>>>
>>>> -1 (sorry)
>>>>
>>>> There are some files with invalid license headers:
>>>> /util/src/main/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/bcel/classfile/EnclosingMethod.java
>>>>
>>>> /util/src/main/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/bcel/classfile/LocalVariableTypeTable.java
>
> The license headers are not Apache source license headers. However, this does not necessarily make them invalid source for an Apache release. The files are not AL2 licensed. So, it makes sense that they would not contain an Apache source license header. Apache releases can contain source files that are licensed under a number of licenses that the ASF has determined to be compatible with AL2. Here is a pretty good overview -- http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
>
> The source files in question were originally CPL Licensed. There's a further comment that the ASF has elected to distribute the file under an EPL license. I haven't looked to see when this "relicense" occurred, or if I agree with it. For this discussion it's largely irrelevant. CPL and EPL are equivalent for the purposes of this discussion.
>
> From the web site, you'll note that both CPL 1.0 and EPL 1.0 are Category B licenses. As such, these files could not be included in an Apache *source* release (they could be included in binary form), unless they fall into the following exclusion:
>
> "For small amounts of source that is directly consumed by the ASF product at runtime in source form, and for which that source is unlikely to be changed anyway (say, by virtue of being specified by a standard), this action is sufficient. An example of this is the web-facesconfig_1_0.dtd, whose inclusion is mandated by the JSR 127: JavaServer Faces specification.
>
> Code that is more substantial, more volatile, or not directly consumed at runtime in source form may only be distributed in binary form."
>
> My guess is that this code is unlikely to change, but probably still does not fall under the above guidelines (e.g. AFAIK, it is "not directly consumed at runtime in source form"). We could discuss this if others disagree with this conclusion...
>
> One note: If the license for these files were instead BSD or any other Category A license, they would be fine for an Apache release...
>
> --kevan
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat
Posted by Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com>.
On Apr 30, 2010, at 3:10 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>
> IIUC then I think we do need to fix this for the following reasons:
>
> 1) We are releasing these artifacts - even if they are copies of Tomcat artifacts. The artifact is being released under the groupID "org.apache.geronimo.ext.tomcat" and it is being released in source (not just binary) form.
I agree with your general conclusion, but don't necessarily agree with how you got there... :-). I definitely agree with your statement in 1).
>
> 2) In addition to that, I can't see where Tomcat has actually ever released these files - so it may be that we are "pre-releasing" them rather than "re-releasing" them. I see a tag for Tomcat 7.0.0 RC1 but I don't see any artifacts available yet on any repositories.
As far as I can tell, Tomcat never concluded their vote on 7.0.0. I would assume the vote is cancelled. The issue of these two files was raised in their vote. And the possibility of removing them was also suggested. More below...
<snip>
>>
>> On 4/30/10 1:10 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>>>
>>> -1 (sorry)
>>>
>>> There are some files with invalid license headers:
>>> /util/src/main/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/bcel/classfile/EnclosingMethod.java
>>>
>>> /util/src/main/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/bcel/classfile/LocalVariableTypeTable.java
The license headers are not Apache source license headers. However, this does not necessarily make them invalid source for an Apache release. The files are not AL2 licensed. So, it makes sense that they would not contain an Apache source license header. Apache releases can contain source files that are licensed under a number of licenses that the ASF has determined to be compatible with AL2. Here is a pretty good overview -- http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
The source files in question were originally CPL Licensed. There's a further comment that the ASF has elected to distribute the file under an EPL license. I haven't looked to see when this "relicense" occurred, or if I agree with it. For this discussion it's largely irrelevant. CPL and EPL are equivalent for the purposes of this discussion.
From the web site, you'll note that both CPL 1.0 and EPL 1.0 are Category B licenses. As such, these files could not be included in an Apache *source* release (they could be included in binary form), unless they fall into the following exclusion:
"For small amounts of source that is directly consumed by the ASF product at runtime in source form, and for which that source is unlikely to be changed anyway (say, by virtue of being specified by a standard), this action is sufficient. An example of this is the web-facesconfig_1_0.dtd, whose inclusion is mandated by the JSR 127: JavaServer Faces specification.
Code that is more substantial, more volatile, or not directly consumed at runtime in source form may only be distributed in binary form."
My guess is that this code is unlikely to change, but probably still does not fall under the above guidelines (e.g. AFAIK, it is "not directly consumed at runtime in source form"). We could discuss this if others disagree with this conclusion...
One note: If the license for these files were instead BSD or any other Category A license, they would be fine for an Apache release...
--kevan
Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat
Posted by Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net>.
IIUC then I think we do need to fix this for the following reasons:
1) We are releasing these artifacts - even if they are copies of Tomcat
artifacts. The artifact is being released under the groupID
"org.apache.geronimo.ext.tomcat" and it is being released in source (not
just binary) form.
2) In addition to that, I can't see where Tomcat has actually ever
released these files - so it may be that we are "pre-releasing" them
rather than "re-releasing" them. I see a tag for Tomcat 7.0.0 RC1 but I
don't see any artifacts available yet on any repositories.
Joe
On 4/30/10 2:29 PM, Donald Woods wrote:
> Since those are Tomcat source files, does that really mean we have to
> fix their source before we can re-release it?
>
>
> -Donald
>
>
> On 4/30/10 1:10 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>>
>> -1 (sorry)
>>
>> There are some files with invalid license headers:
>> /util/src/main/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/bcel/classfile/EnclosingMethod.java
>>
>> /util/src/main/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/bcel/classfile/LocalVariableTypeTable.java
>>
>>
>>
>> Joe
>>
>>
>> On 4/28/10 6:30 AM, Ivan wrote:
>>> Please vote for Geronimo Customized Tomcat 7.0.0.0
>>>
>>> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>>
>>> [ ] +1 approve
>>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>>
>>>
>>> Staging repo:
>>>
>>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-030/
>>> <https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-027/>
>>>
>>>
>>> Source repo:
>>>
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/external/tags/tomcat-parent-7.0.0.0/
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> I have run the servlet TCK, at least, it does not bring new failures.
>>>
>>> I paste svn log to show the Tomcat revision :
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> r938833 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 17:13:40 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>>> line
>>>
>>> [maven-release-plugin] prepare for next development iteration
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> r938831 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 17:12:51 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>>> line
>>>
>>> [maven-release-plugin] prepare release tomcat-parent-7.0.0.0
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> r938824 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 17:00:58 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>>> line
>>>
>>> Merge Tomcat r938814 to fix the ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> r938801 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:52:22 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>>> line
>>>
>>> Revert the changes due to key verification error
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> r938794 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:11:44 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>>> line
>>>
>>> [maven-release-plugin] prepare for next development iteration
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> r938792 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:11:19 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>>> line
>>>
>>> [maven-release-plugin] prepare release tomcat-parent-7.0.0.0
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> r938790 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:01:21 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>>> line
>>>
>>> Fix an ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException exception
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> r938375 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 17:33:06 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1
>>> line
>>>
>>> Merge r938373 from Tomcat trunk
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> r938331 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 14:52:17 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1
>>> line
>>>
>>> Not sure why those configurations are missed while copying them from
>>> tomcat-archetype...
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> r938306 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 11:14:03 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1
>>> line
>>>
>>> Use the released spec versions
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> r938303 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 10:53:48 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1
>>> line
>>>
>>> GERONIMO-4980 new tomcat snapshot at rev 938302
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Ivan
>>
>>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat
Posted by Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org>.
Since those are Tomcat source files, does that really mean we have to
fix their source before we can re-release it?
-Donald
On 4/30/10 1:10 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>
> -1 (sorry)
>
> There are some files with invalid license headers:
> /util/src/main/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/bcel/classfile/EnclosingMethod.java
>
> /util/src/main/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/bcel/classfile/LocalVariableTypeTable.java
>
>
>
> Joe
>
>
> On 4/28/10 6:30 AM, Ivan wrote:
>> Please vote for Geronimo Customized Tomcat 7.0.0.0
>>
>> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>
>> [ ] +1 approve
>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>
>>
>> Staging repo:
>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-030/
>> <https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-027/>
>>
>>
>> Source repo:
>>
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/external/tags/tomcat-parent-7.0.0.0/
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> I have run the servlet TCK, at least, it does not bring new failures.
>>
>> I paste svn log to show the Tomcat revision :
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938833 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 17:13:40 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> [maven-release-plugin] prepare for next development iteration
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938831 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 17:12:51 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> [maven-release-plugin] prepare release tomcat-parent-7.0.0.0
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938824 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 17:00:58 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> Merge Tomcat r938814 to fix the ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938801 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:52:22 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> Revert the changes due to key verification error
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938794 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:11:44 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> [maven-release-plugin] prepare for next development iteration
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938792 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:11:19 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> [maven-release-plugin] prepare release tomcat-parent-7.0.0.0
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938790 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:01:21 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> Fix an ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException exception
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938375 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 17:33:06 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> Merge r938373 from Tomcat trunk
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938331 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 14:52:17 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> Not sure why those configurations are missed while copying them from
>> tomcat-archetype...
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938306 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 11:14:03 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> Use the released spec versions
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938303 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 10:53:48 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> GERONIMO-4980 new tomcat snapshot at rev 938302
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>> Ivan
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat
Posted by Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net>.
Oh ... one more little thing I forgot to mention is that the link to the
staging repo in the vote is incorrect as it resolves to -027 instead of -030
Joe
On 4/30/10 1:10 PM, Joe Bohn wrote:
>
> -1 (sorry)
>
> There are some files with invalid license headers:
> /util/src/main/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/bcel/classfile/EnclosingMethod.java
>
> /util/src/main/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/bcel/classfile/LocalVariableTypeTable.java
>
>
>
> Joe
>
>
> On 4/28/10 6:30 AM, Ivan wrote:
>> Please vote for Geronimo Customized Tomcat 7.0.0.0
>>
>> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>
>> [ ] +1 approve
>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>
>>
>> Staging repo:
>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-030/
>> <https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-027/>
>>
>>
>> Source repo:
>>
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/external/tags/tomcat-parent-7.0.0.0/
>>
>>
>> --
>>
>> I have run the servlet TCK, at least, it does not bring new failures.
>>
>> I paste svn log to show the Tomcat revision :
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938833 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 17:13:40 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> [maven-release-plugin] prepare for next development iteration
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938831 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 17:12:51 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> [maven-release-plugin] prepare release tomcat-parent-7.0.0.0
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938824 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 17:00:58 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> Merge Tomcat r938814 to fix the ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938801 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:52:22 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> Revert the changes due to key verification error
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938794 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:11:44 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> [maven-release-plugin] prepare for next development iteration
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938792 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:11:19 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> [maven-release-plugin] prepare release tomcat-parent-7.0.0.0
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938790 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:01:21 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> Fix an ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException exception
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938375 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 17:33:06 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> Merge r938373 from Tomcat trunk
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938331 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 14:52:17 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> Not sure why those configurations are missed while copying them from
>> tomcat-archetype...
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938306 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 11:14:03 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> Use the released spec versions
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938303 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 10:53:48 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> GERONIMO-4980 new tomcat snapshot at rev 938302
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>> Ivan
>
>
Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat
Posted by Joe Bohn <jo...@earthlink.net>.
-1 (sorry)
There are some files with invalid license headers:
/util/src/main/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/bcel/classfile/EnclosingMethod.java
/util/src/main/java/org/apache/tomcat/util/bcel/classfile/LocalVariableTypeTable.java
Joe
On 4/28/10 6:30 AM, Ivan wrote:
> Please vote for Geronimo Customized Tomcat 7.0.0.0
>
> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1 approve
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>
>
> Staging repo:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-030/ <https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-027/>
>
> Source repo:
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/external/tags/tomcat-parent-7.0.0.0/
>
> --
>
> I have run the servlet TCK, at least, it does not bring new failures.
>
> I paste svn log to show the Tomcat revision :
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938833 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 17:13:40 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1 line
>
> [maven-release-plugin] prepare for next development iteration
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938831 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 17:12:51 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1 line
>
> [maven-release-plugin] prepare release tomcat-parent-7.0.0.0
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938824 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 17:00:58 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1 line
>
> Merge Tomcat r938814 to fix the ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938801 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:52:22 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1 line
>
> Revert the changes due to key verification error
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938794 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:11:44 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1 line
>
> [maven-release-plugin] prepare for next development iteration
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938792 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:11:19 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1 line
>
> [maven-release-plugin] prepare release tomcat-parent-7.0.0.0
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938790 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:01:21 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1 line
>
> Fix an ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException exception
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938375 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 17:33:06 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1 line
>
> Merge r938373 from Tomcat trunk
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938331 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 14:52:17 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1 line
>
> Not sure why those configurations are missed while copying them from
> tomcat-archetype...
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938306 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 11:14:03 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1 line
>
> Use the released spec versions
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938303 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 10:53:48 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1 line
>
> GERONIMO-4980 new tomcat snapshot at rev 938302
>
>
> Thanks
> Ivan
Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat
Posted by Ivan <xh...@gmail.com>.
I just run the JSP TCk testing, no new issues are brought.
2010/4/29 Rick McGuire <ri...@gmail.com>
> +1
>
> built ok and was able to build Geronimo with the new version.
>
>
> On 4/28/2010 6:30 AM, Ivan wrote:
>
>> Please vote for Geronimo Customized Tomcat 7.0.0.0
>>
>> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>>
>> [ ] +1 approve
>> [ ] +0 no opinion
>> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>>
>>
>> Staging repo:
>>
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-030/<
>> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-027/
>> >
>>
>>
>> Source repo:
>>
>>
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/external/tags/tomcat-parent-7.0.0.0/
>>
>> --
>>
>> I have run the servlet TCK, at least, it does not bring new failures.
>>
>> I paste svn log to show the Tomcat revision :
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938833 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 17:13:40 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> [maven-release-plugin] prepare for next development iteration
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938831 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 17:12:51 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> [maven-release-plugin] prepare release tomcat-parent-7.0.0.0
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938824 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 17:00:58 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> Merge Tomcat r938814 to fix the ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938801 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:52:22 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> Revert the changes due to key verification error
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938794 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:11:44 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> [maven-release-plugin] prepare for next development iteration
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938792 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:11:19 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> [maven-release-plugin] prepare release tomcat-parent-7.0.0.0
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938790 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:01:21 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> Fix an ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException exception
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938375 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 17:33:06 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> Merge r938373 from Tomcat trunk
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938331 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 14:52:17 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> Not sure why those configurations are missed while copying them from
>> tomcat-archetype...
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938306 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 11:14:03 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> Use the released spec versions
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> r938303 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 10:53:48 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1
>> line
>>
>> GERONIMO-4980 new tomcat snapshot at rev 938302
>>
>>
>> Thanks
>> Ivan
>>
>
>
--
Ivan
Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat
Posted by Rick McGuire <ri...@gmail.com>.
+1
built ok and was able to build Geronimo with the new version.
On 4/28/2010 6:30 AM, Ivan wrote:
> Please vote for Geronimo Customized Tomcat 7.0.0.0
>
> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1 approve
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>
>
> Staging repo:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-030/
> <https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-027/>
>
> Source repo:
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/external/tags/tomcat-parent-7.0.0.0/
>
> --
>
> I have run the servlet TCK, at least, it does not bring new failures.
>
> I paste svn log to show the Tomcat revision :
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938833 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 17:13:40 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
> line
>
> [maven-release-plugin] prepare for next development iteration
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938831 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 17:12:51 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
> line
>
> [maven-release-plugin] prepare release tomcat-parent-7.0.0.0
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938824 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 17:00:58 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
> line
>
> Merge Tomcat r938814 to fix the ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938801 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:52:22 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
> line
>
> Revert the changes due to key verification error
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938794 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:11:44 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
> line
>
> [maven-release-plugin] prepare for next development iteration
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938792 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:11:19 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
> line
>
> [maven-release-plugin] prepare release tomcat-parent-7.0.0.0
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938790 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:01:21 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1
> line
>
> Fix an ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException exception
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938375 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 17:33:06 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1
> line
>
> Merge r938373 from Tomcat trunk
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938331 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 14:52:17 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1
> line
>
> Not sure why those configurations are missed while copying them from
> tomcat-archetype...
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938306 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 11:14:03 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1
> line
>
> Use the released spec versions
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938303 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 10:53:48 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1
> line
>
> GERONIMO-4980 new tomcat snapshot at rev 938302
>
>
> Thanks
> Ivan
Re: [VOTE] Release Geronimo Customized Tomcat
Posted by Donald Woods <dw...@apache.org>.
+1
Donald
On 4/28/10 6:30 AM, Ivan wrote:
> Please vote for Geronimo Customized Tomcat 7.0.0.0
>
> Vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1 approve
> [ ] +0 no opinion
> [ ] -1 disapprove (and reason why)
>
>
> Staging repo:
>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-030/ <https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachegeronimo-027/>
>
> Source repo:
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/geronimo/external/tags/tomcat-parent-7.0.0.0/
>
> --
>
> I have run the servlet TCK, at least, it does not bring new failures.
>
> I paste svn log to show the Tomcat revision :
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938833 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 17:13:40 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1 line
>
> [maven-release-plugin] prepare for next development iteration
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938831 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 17:12:51 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1 line
>
> [maven-release-plugin] prepare release tomcat-parent-7.0.0.0
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938824 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 17:00:58 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1 line
>
> Merge Tomcat r938814 to fix the ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938801 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:52:22 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1 line
>
> Revert the changes due to key verification error
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938794 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:11:44 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1 line
>
> [maven-release-plugin] prepare for next development iteration
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938792 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:11:19 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1 line
>
> [maven-release-plugin] prepare release tomcat-parent-7.0.0.0
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938790 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-28 14:01:21 +0800 (Wed, 28 Apr 2010) | 1 line
>
> Fix an ArrayIndexOutOfBoundsException exception
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938375 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 17:33:06 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1 line
>
> Merge r938373 from Tomcat trunk
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938331 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 14:52:17 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1 line
>
> Not sure why those configurations are missed while copying them from
> tomcat-archetype...
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938306 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 11:14:03 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1 line
>
> Use the released spec versions
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> r938303 | xuhaihong | 2010-04-27 10:53:48 +0800 (Tue, 27 Apr 2010) | 1 line
>
> GERONIMO-4980 new tomcat snapshot at rev 938302
>
>
> Thanks
> Ivan