[VOTE] Release Apache Maven 3.0-alpha-4

[Benjamin Bentmann]

Hi,

Ready for the next round ;-) ?

We solved 6 issues:
http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10500&version=14951

There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA:
http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&pid=10500&status=1

Staging repo:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-003/

Staged source and binary distros:
https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-003/org/apache/maven/apache-maven/3.0-alpha-4/

Guide to testing staged releases:
http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html

Vote open for 72 hours.

[ ] +1
[ ] +0
[ ] -1

+1 from me


Benjamim


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[Jason van Zyl-2]

+1

Keep them coming!

On 2009-11-13, at 7:25 PM, Benjamin Bentmann wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Ready for the next round ;-) ?
>
> We solved 6 issues:
> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10500&version=14951
>
> There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA:
> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&pid=10500&status=1
>
> Staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-003/
>
> Staged source and binary distros:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-003/org/apache/maven/apache-maven/3.0-alpha-4/
>
> Guide to testing staged releases:
> http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html
>
> Vote open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
>
> +1 from me
>
>
> Benjamim
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>

Thanks,

Jason

----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder,  Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
----------------------------------------------------------


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[Paul Benedict-2]

+1

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[olamy-2]

+1

2009/11/13 Benjamin Bentmann <benjamin.bentmann@...>:

> Hi,
>
> Ready for the next round ;-) ?
>
> We solved 6 issues:
> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10500&version=14951
>
> There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA:
> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&pid=10500&status=1
>
> Staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-003/
>
> Staged source and binary distros:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-003/org/apache/maven/apache-maven/3.0-alpha-4/
>
> Guide to testing staged releases:
> http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html
>
> Vote open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
>
> +1 from me
>
>
> Benjamim
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>
>

--
Olivier

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[Stephen Connolly-2]

+1

Stephen

2009/11/13 Benjamin Bentmann <benjamin.bentmann@...>:

> Hi,
>
> Ready for the next round ;-) ?
>
> We solved 6 issues:
> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/ReleaseNote.jspa?projectId=10500&version=14951
>
> There are still a couple of issues left in JIRA:
> http://jira.codehaus.org/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?reset=true&pid=10500&status=1
>
> Staging repo:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-003/
>
> Staged source and binary distros:
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/maven-003/org/apache/maven/apache-maven/3.0-alpha-4/
>
> Guide to testing staged releases:
> http://maven.apache.org/guides/development/guide-testing-releases.html
>
> Vote open for 72 hours.
>
> [ ] +1
> [ ] +0
> [ ] -1
>
> +1 from me
>
>
> Benjamim
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[dfabulich]

I was waiting until alpha-3 was out to merge in the MNG-3004 branch.
MNG-3004 passes all ITs, including a few new ITs of the experimental
multithreaded mode.

Can we recut alpha-4 with MNG-3004 in it?

-Dan


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[Jason van Zyl-2]

On 2009-11-14, at 4:47 AM, Dan Fabulich wrote:

>
> I was waiting until alpha-3 was out to merge in the MNG-3004 branch.  
> MNG-3004 passes all ITs, including a few new ITs of the experimental  
> multithreaded mode.
>
> Can we recut alpha-4 with MNG-3004 in it?
>

I'd personally still like to see a little more design around the multi-
threading first. We are going to roll out alpha after alpha based on  
feedback we get from users to fix common problems first. I think that  
is the real priority we have. I honestly do not see the urgent rush to  
push this is. If we have fixes for users I want to push those out  
first. I want to be cautious about new features. We haven't added any  
new features to the core yet. I have 5-10 things on git branches but I  
just don't think it's the priority.

Honestly there's not really any public proposal or design to look at,  
and I really think that we should try your branch against the  
performance framework and make sure everything is ok. I'm not just  
doing this with your feature, I've done it with all the ones that I  
have. I've refrained from putting in because I want to make sure we  
don't ever go backward and I don't think there is anything wrong with  
erring on the side of caution and waiting a couple weeks.

We'll probably keep doing 1-2 alphas a week so there isn't going to be  
a huge time span you have to wait. I think we need a proposal and I  
think that we have to get into the habit of having two other people  
review new features at a bare minimum. I don't think this is an  
unreasonable approach.

> -Dan
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>

Thanks,

Jason

----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder,  Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
----------------------------------------------------------


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[dfabulich]

Jason van Zyl wrote:

> Honestly there's not really any public proposal or design to look at

Got one now :-)

http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Experimental+Multithreading+Support

> and I really think that we should try your branch against the
> performance framework and make sure everything is ok.

I think this is sonatype code that I don't have access to?  Can somebody
at Sonatype just run my code against the performance framework and see how
it goes?

-Dan

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[Jason van Zyl-2]

On 2009-11-14, at 8:27 PM, Dan Fabulich wrote:

> Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
>> Honestly there's not really any public proposal or design to look at
>
> Got one now :-)
>
> http://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Experimental+Multithreading+Support
>
>> and I really think that we should try your branch against the  
>> performance framework and make sure everything is ok.
>
> I think this is sonatype code that I don't have access to?  Can  
> somebody at Sonatype just run my code against the performance  
> framework and see how it goes?
>

We can give you access. There are licensing problems with checking it  
in here which is why it's not here. But anyone should be able to use  
it. We'll set it up for next week.

> -Dan
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>

Thanks,

Jason

----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder,  Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
----------------------------------------------------------


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[Benjamin Bentmann]

Jason van Zyl wrote:

> We can give you access.

Well,
   http://svn.sonatype.org/m2eclipse/sandbox/trunk/maven-performance-tests/

is already public.


Benjamin

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[Jason van Zyl-2]

There you go, it's all yours Dan :-)

On 2009-11-14, at 8:38 PM, Benjamin Bentmann wrote:

> Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
>> We can give you access.
>
> Well,
>  http://svn.sonatype.org/m2eclipse/sandbox/trunk/maven-performance-tests/
>
> is already public.
>
>
> Benjamin
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>

Thanks,

Jason

----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder,  Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
----------------------------------------------------------


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[brettporter]

On 15/11/2009, at 6:33 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:

>> I think this is sonatype code that I don't have access to?  Can somebody at Sonatype just run my code against the performance framework and see how it goes?
>>
>
> We can give you access. There are licensing problems with checking it in here which is why it's not here. But anyone should be able to use it. We'll set it up for next week.

What are the licensing issues? Perhaps we can sort something out.

- Brett
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[Ralph Goers]

On Nov 15, 2009, at 3:47 PM, Brett Porter wrote:

>
> On 15/11/2009, at 6:33 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
>>> I think this is sonatype code that I don't have access to?  Can somebody at Sonatype just run my code against the performance framework and see how it goes?
>>>
>>
>> We can give you access. There are licensing problems with checking it in here which is why it's not here. But anyone should be able to use it. We'll set it up for next week.
>
> What are the licensing issues? Perhaps we can sort something out.
>

I am curious about this as well.

Ralph


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[Jason van Zyl-2]

http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html

The performance framework is EPL, which is not an authorized license  
according to our documentation. We are likely to make some  
modifications, if we haven't already, and so it's easier not to put it  
here. If we made anything more then minimal changes we have to back it  
out.

The performance framework is the one use for testing Eclipse itself.

On 2009-11-16, at 1:39 AM, Ralph Goers wrote:

>
> On Nov 15, 2009, at 3:47 PM, Brett Porter wrote:
>
>>
>> On 15/11/2009, at 6:33 AM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>>
>>>> I think this is sonatype code that I don't have access to?  Can  
>>>> somebody at Sonatype just run my code against the performance  
>>>> framework and see how it goes?
>>>>
>>>
>>> We can give you access. There are licensing problems with checking  
>>> it in here which is why it's not here. But anyone should be able  
>>> to use it. We'll set it up for next week.
>>
>> What are the licensing issues? Perhaps we can sort something out.
>>
>
> I am curious about this as well.
>
> Ralph
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>

Thanks,

Jason

----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder,  Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
----------------------------------------------------------


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[brettporter]

On 16/11/2009, at 7:14 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:

> http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
>
> The performance framework is EPL, which is not an authorized license according to our documentation.

You mean org.eclipse.test.performance here?

> We are likely to make some modifications, if we haven't already, and so it's easier not to put it here. If we made anything more then minimal changes we have to back it out.

You mean http://svn.sonatype.org/m2eclipse/sandbox/trunk/maven-performance-tests/org.eclipse.test.performance.patch here? Everything else in http://svn.sonatype.org/m2eclipse/sandbox/trunk/maven-performance-tests/ is under ALv2?

If that is the case, can't we commit the patch & EPL'd binary to the SVN repo here (or put the binary in a Maven repository), and submit the patches upstream in the hope that we only need to use the official Eclipse binary down the track?

This shouldn't be a problem in general - we aren't checking in any EPL sources. And further, we aren't intending to redistribute the performance framework as a release anyway.

Cheers,
Brett



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[Jason van Zyl-2]

On 2009-11-16, at 9:27 AM, Brett Porter wrote:

>
>
> On 16/11/2009, at 7:14 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
>> http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
>>
>> The performance framework is EPL, which is not an authorized  
>> license according to our documentation.
>
> You mean org.eclipse.test.performance here?
>
>> We are likely to make some modifications, if we haven't already,  
>> and so it's easier not to put it here. If we made anything more  
>> then minimal changes we have to back it out.
>
> You mean http://svn.sonatype.org/m2eclipse/sandbox/trunk/maven-performance-tests/org.eclipse.test.performance.patch 
>  here? Everything else in http://svn.sonatype.org/m2eclipse/sandbox/trunk/maven-performance-tests/ 
>  is under ALv2?
>

They actually should probably be EPL because it would be nice if they  
could ultimately go back to Eclipse.

> If that is the case, can't we commit the patch & EPL'd binary to the  
> SVN repo here (or put the binary in a Maven repository), and submit  
> the patches upstream in the hope that we only need to use the  
> official Eclipse binary down the track?
>
> This shouldn't be a problem in general - we aren't checking in any  
> EPL sources. And further, we aren't intending to redistribute the  
> performance framework as a release anyway.
>

I definitely plan to release this for people to test. We're working on  
trying to make it dead simple for people to materialize Maven inside  
M2Eclipse along with the integration tests and the performance tests.  
It needs to be very easy for people try this. I like the source way,  
you and Brian like the binary way of packaging up the ITs. So I plan  
to try both.

I don't want to be hindered by a licensing policy to make quick  
changes at the source level or have remove the possibility of releasing.

So 1) it's unclear as almost everything is here legally, and 2) it's  
too limited and cumbersome even in its current form and 3) it's not  
any less convenient checking it out of one place over another. The  
goals is to make it easy for people who want to try this.

> Cheers,
> Brett
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>

Thanks,

Jason

----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder,  Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
----------------------------------------------------------


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[brettporter]

On 16/11/2009, at 7:35 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:

>>
>>> We are likely to make some modifications, if we haven't already, and so it's easier not to put it here. If we made anything more then minimal changes we have to back it out.
>>
>> You mean http://svn.sonatype.org/m2eclipse/sandbox/trunk/maven-performance-tests/org.eclipse.test.performance.patch here? Everything else in http://svn.sonatype.org/m2eclipse/sandbox/trunk/maven-performance-tests/ is under ALv2?
>>
>
> They actually should probably be EPL because it would be nice if they could ultimately go back to Eclipse.

You can dual license it like Jetty did, but I don't quite understand - this looks like a performance testing framework for Maven, not m2e.

>
>> If that is the case, can't we commit the patch & EPL'd binary to the SVN repo here (or put the binary in a Maven repository), and submit the patches upstream in the hope that we only need to use the official Eclipse binary down the track?
>>
>> This shouldn't be a problem in general - we aren't checking in any EPL sources. And further, we aren't intending to redistribute the performance framework as a release anyway.
>>
>
> I definitely plan to release this for people to test. We're working on trying to make it dead simple for people to materialize Maven inside M2Eclipse along with the integration tests and the performance tests. It needs to be very easy for people try this. I like the source way, you and Brian like the binary way of packaging up the ITs. So I plan to try both.
>
> I don't want to be hindered by a licensing policy to make quick changes at the source level or have remove the possibility of releasing.
>
> So 1) it's unclear as almost everything is here legally, and 2) it's too limited and cumbersome even in its current form and 3) it's not any less convenient checking it out of one place over another. The goals is to make it easy for people who want to try this.

Sorry, but I can't parse what you are saying here. I don't see what you are talking about releasing - the framework looks designed to run from source.

Perhaps you could provide more information on how you intend for it to be used here - I'm going on the README.txt.

- Brett


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[Jason van Zyl-2]

If you can get Larry to sign off on:

1) We going to keep modifying the source as necessary
2) It's EPL and it should be that way because that's where we got it  
from
3) And we might want to release it

I'm not going to discuss this ad nauseum because I believe Larry would  
say technically it's going to be a violation of the license even  
though no one cares or will prosecute us. But what's the point if we  
don't adhere to some semblance of order.

If you want to do the work and Larry says cool. That's cool with me  
and we can move it over.

On 2009-11-16, at 9:27 AM, Brett Porter wrote:

>
>
> On 16/11/2009, at 7:14 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
>> http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
>>
>> The performance framework is EPL, which is not an authorized  
>> license according to our documentation.
>
> You mean org.eclipse.test.performance here?
>
>> We are likely to make some modifications, if we haven't already,  
>> and so it's easier not to put it here. If we made anything more  
>> then minimal changes we have to back it out.
>
> You mean http://svn.sonatype.org/m2eclipse/sandbox/trunk/maven-performance-tests/org.eclipse.test.performance.patch 
>  here? Everything else in http://svn.sonatype.org/m2eclipse/sandbox/trunk/maven-performance-tests/ 
>  is under ALv2?
>
> If that is the case, can't we commit the patch & EPL'd binary to the  
> SVN repo here (or put the binary in a Maven repository), and submit  
> the patches upstream in the hope that we only need to use the  
> official Eclipse binary down the track?
>
> This shouldn't be a problem in general - we aren't checking in any  
> EPL sources. And further, we aren't intending to redistribute the  
> performance framework as a release anyway.
>
> Cheers,
> Brett
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>

Thanks,

Jason

----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder,  Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
----------------------------------------------------------


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[brettporter]

You've lost me.

Everything I see at http://svn.sonatype.org/m2eclipse/sandbox/trunk/maven-performance-tests/ is under the ALv2 accdg to headers except:
- the contents of a test maven repository
- http://svn.sonatype.org/m2eclipse/sandbox/trunk/maven-performance-tests/remoteRepo/ which is a subset of the central repo to avoid having to download things (which can probably be done differently anyway)
- http://svn.sonatype.org/m2eclipse/sandbox/trunk/maven-performance-tests/src/test/lib/ivjperf.dll which is EPL in binary form which is not a problem according to the policy.

The README.txt instructs folks to check out EPL sources and apply a patch. That's not a problem, there are no EPL sources in the main repository.

You said "There are licensing problems with checking it in here which is why it's not here", which sounded like you wanted it to be here, but it can't. I wanted to point out that, in fact, it can. I'm trying to answer your concern, not force you to move it.

Thanks,
Brett

On 16/11/2009, at 7:55 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:

> If you can get Larry to sign off on:
>
> 1) We going to keep modifying the source as necessary
> 2) It's EPL and it should be that way because that's where we got it from
> 3) And we might want to release it
>
> I'm not going to discuss this ad nauseum because I believe Larry would say technically it's going to be a violation of the license even though no one cares or will prosecute us. But what's the point if we don't adhere to some semblance of order.
>
> If you want to do the work and Larry says cool. That's cool with me and we can move it over.
>
> On 2009-11-16, at 9:27 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 16/11/2009, at 7:14 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>>
>>> http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
>>>
>>> The performance framework is EPL, which is not an authorized license according to our documentation.
>>
>> You mean org.eclipse.test.performance here?
>>
>>> We are likely to make some modifications, if we haven't already, and so it's easier not to put it here. If we made anything more then minimal changes we have to back it out.
>>
>> You mean http://svn.sonatype.org/m2eclipse/sandbox/trunk/maven-performance-tests/org.eclipse.test.performance.patch here? Everything else in http://svn.sonatype.org/m2eclipse/sandbox/trunk/maven-performance-tests/ is under ALv2?
>>
>> If that is the case, can't we commit the patch & EPL'd binary to the SVN repo here (or put the binary in a Maven repository), and submit the patches upstream in the hope that we only need to use the official Eclipse binary down the track?
>>
>> This shouldn't be a problem in general - we aren't checking in any EPL sources. And further, we aren't intending to redistribute the performance framework as a release anyway.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Brett
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jason
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------
> Jason van Zyl
> Founder,  Apache Maven
> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
> ----------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...

[Jason van Zyl-2]

On 2009-11-16, at 10:15 AM, Brett Porter wrote:

> You've lost me.
>

Then I consider you lost. Go back and read what I wrote. At any rate  
this is not by biggest concern at the moment. If the conditions 1-3  
are met in the last email and Larry says it's fine, I'm fine.

> Everything I see at http://svn.sonatype.org/m2eclipse/sandbox/trunk/maven-performance-tests/ 
>  is under the ALv2 accdg to headers except:
> - the contents of a test maven repository
> - http://svn.sonatype.org/m2eclipse/sandbox/trunk/maven-performance-tests/remoteRepo/ 
>  which is a subset of the central repo to avoid having to download  
> things (which can probably be done differently anyway)
> - http://svn.sonatype.org/m2eclipse/sandbox/trunk/maven-performance-tests/src/test/lib/ivjperf.dll 
>  which is EPL in binary form which is not a problem according to the  
> policy.
>

And the actual patch itself, which is EPL. Which is the problem. It's  
EPL because we want it to go back. When who knows.

> The README.txt instructs folks to check out EPL sources and apply a  
> patch. That's not a problem, there are no EPL sources in the main  
> repository.
>

The patch is EPL. It may get bigger (as I said in the previous posts).  
It may not get merged at all and that's not unlikely with the pace at  
which patches get absorbed in some Eclipse projects and we may just  
merge it. I definitely want to be able to release it.

> You said "There are licensing problems with checking it in here  
> which is why it's not here", which sounded like you wanted it to be  
> here, but it can't. I wanted to point out that, in fact, it can. I'm  
> trying to answer your concern, not force you to move it.
>

You talk to Larry, if he signs off we're good. We'll just leave it  
where it is until then. How's that sound for a reasonable path forward?

> Thanks,
> Brett
>
> On 16/11/2009, at 7:55 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>
>> If you can get Larry to sign off on:
>>
>> 1) We going to keep modifying the source as necessary
>> 2) It's EPL and it should be that way because that's where we got  
>> it from
>> 3) And we might want to release it
>>
>> I'm not going to discuss this ad nauseum because I believe Larry  
>> would say technically it's going to be a violation of the license  
>> even though no one cares or will prosecute us. But what's the point  
>> if we don't adhere to some semblance of order.
>>
>> If you want to do the work and Larry says cool. That's cool with me  
>> and we can move it over.
>>
>> On 2009-11-16, at 9:27 AM, Brett Porter wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 16/11/2009, at 7:14 PM, Jason van Zyl wrote:
>>>
>>>> http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
>>>>
>>>> The performance framework is EPL, which is not an authorized  
>>>> license according to our documentation.
>>>
>>> You mean org.eclipse.test.performance here?
>>>
>>>> We are likely to make some modifications, if we haven't already,  
>>>> and so it's easier not to put it here. If we made anything more  
>>>> then minimal changes we have to back it out.
>>>
>>> You mean http://svn.sonatype.org/m2eclipse/sandbox/trunk/maven-performance-tests/org.eclipse.test.performance.patch 
>>>  here? Everything else in http://svn.sonatype.org/m2eclipse/sandbox/trunk/maven-performance-tests/ 
>>>  is under ALv2?
>>>
>>> If that is the case, can't we commit the patch & EPL'd binary to  
>>> the SVN repo here (or put the binary in a Maven repository), and  
>>> submit the patches upstream in the hope that we only need to use  
>>> the official Eclipse binary down the track?
>>>
>>> This shouldn't be a problem in general - we aren't checking in any  
>>> EPL sources. And further, we aren't intending to redistribute the  
>>> performance framework as a release anyway.
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Brett
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Jason
>>
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>> Jason van Zyl
>> Founder,  Apache Maven
>> http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
>> ----------------------------------------------------------
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...
>

Thanks,

Jason

----------------------------------------------------------
Jason van Zyl
Founder,  Apache Maven
http://twitter.com/jvanzyl
----------------------------------------------------------


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@...