You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to dev@plc4x.apache.org by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de> on 2018/11/17 14:58:23 UTC

[DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.2.0 RC1

This is the discussion thread for the corresponding VOTE thread.



Please keep discussions in this thread to simplify the counting of votes.



If you have to vote -1 please mention a brief description on why and then take the details to this thread.

AW: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.2.0 RC1

Posted by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>.

Hi all,

so in develop I adjusted the NOTICE and LICENSE files. So in the next release, these issues found in the release should be fixed.
Also did I unify the way the examples are configured. So the Google code is no longer present.

Chris

Am 21.11.18, 10:56 schrieb "Stefan Bodewig" <bo...@apache.org>:

    On 2018-11-17, Christofer Dutz wrote:

    > So if I was to replace the class with one I wrote, it would sort of
    > look exactly like that. Would it be ok in this case to leave it as it
    > currently is (with Apache header)?

    I'm with Justin here, just go ahead with what you've got right now and
    decide whether you want to rewrite the class or re-instate the header
    later. If I had to pick an option and this is a verbatim copy I'd keep
    the original header, but that's just me.

    Stefan

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.2.0 RC1

Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.

On 2018-11-17, Christofer Dutz wrote:

> So if I was to replace the class with one I wrote, it would sort of
> look exactly like that. Would it be ok in this case to leave it as it
> currently is (with Apache header)?

I'm with Justin here, just go ahead with what you've got right now and
decide whether you want to rewrite the class or re-instate the header
later. If I had to pick an option and this is a verbatim copy I'd keep
the original header, but that's just me.

Stefan

AW: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.2.0 RC1

Posted by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>.

Actually having another look at it ...

I started rewriting it with Apache Commons CLI till I noticed it already uses that ... a second look showed that the class contains nothing but the default way the Apache Commons CLI modules should be used to parse commandline-options. So if I was to replace the class with one I wrote, it would sort of look exactly like that. Would it be ok in this case to leave it as it currently is (with Apache header)?

Chris


Am 17.11.18, 17:36 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <ch...@c-ware.de>:

    Hi All,
    
    I just was going to start re-writing the file copied from google and noticed the header was replaced by an Apache header (obviously by myself) ... 
    the strange thing is that I would never have intentionally done that. All I could assume is that IntelliJ automatically updated it when I moved the file. Should I abort the RC and re-instate the Google header?
    
    Chris
    
    Am 17.11.18, 15:58 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <ch...@c-ware.de>:
    
        This is the discussion thread for the corresponding VOTE thread.
        
        
        
        Please keep discussions in this thread to simplify the counting of votes.
        
        
        
        If you have to vote -1 please mention a brief description on why and then take the details to this thread.

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.2.0 RC1

Posted by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>.

Regarding your questions Julian:

The md5 are obsolete and during the last release it was suggested to remove them. I updated the rolling in the develop branch, just didn't merge that back to the release branch.

Chris

Outlook for Android<https://aka.ms/ghei36> herunterladen

________________________________
From: Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>
Sent: Saturday, November 17, 2018 11:45:48 PM
To: dev@plc4x.apache.org
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.2.0 RC1

Hi,

Having one header wrong is not the end of the world, and as an incubating project you have a DISCLAIMER for that reason. I’d continue with the vote.

Thanks,
Justin

Re: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.2.0 RC1

Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.

Hi,

Having one header wrong is not the end of the world, and as an incubating project you have a DISCLAIMER for that reason. I’d continue with the vote.

Thanks,
Justin

AW: [DISCUSS] Apache PLC4X (Incubating) 0.2.0 RC1

Posted by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>.

Hi All,

I just was going to start re-writing the file copied from google and noticed the header was replaced by an Apache header (obviously by myself) ... 
the strange thing is that I would never have intentionally done that. All I could assume is that IntelliJ automatically updated it when I moved the file. Should I abort the RC and re-instate the Google header?

Chris

Am 17.11.18, 15:58 schrieb "Christofer Dutz" <ch...@c-ware.de>:

    This is the discussion thread for the corresponding VOTE thread.
    
    
    
    Please keep discussions in this thread to simplify the counting of votes.
    
    
    
    If you have to vote -1 please mention a brief description on why and then take the details to this thread.