[VOTE] graduate stdcxx to TLP

[Martin Sebor]

After over two years in the incubator, two releases under our belt
(one snapshot and one official release) and a third one coming,
the stdcxx community with the support of our mentors feel that we
are ready to propose to the Incubator PMC to graduate stdcxx to
a Top Level Project. See the following vote thread in the archives:

http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE--ready-to-graduate-tf4386148.html#a12504335

To that end we have prepared the resolution for the Board below
to be presented for consideration at the upcoming Board meeting.

We invite everyone to vote to approve this proposal.

Thank you.
Martin


Establish the Apache C++ Standard Library project:

    WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best interests
    of the Foundation and consistent with the Foundation's purpose to
    establish a Project, to be known as "Apache C++ Standard Library",
    a portable implementation of the C++ Standard library as specified
    in ISO/IEC 14882, International Standard for Programming Languages
    -- C++, for distribution at no charge to the public.

    NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that a Project Management Committee
    (PMC), to be known as the Apache C++ Standard Library Project
    Management Committee, is hereby established pursuant to Bylaws of
    the Foundation; and be it further

    RESOLVED, that the Apache C++ Standard Library PMC be and hereby
    is charged with the creation and maintenance of "Apache C++
    Standard Library"; and be it further

    RESOLVED, that the office of "Vice President, Apache C++ Standard
    Library" be and hereby is created, the person holding such office
    to serve at the direction of the Board of Directors as the chair
    of the Apache C++ Standard Library PMC, and to have primary
    responsibility for management of the projects within the scope
    of responsibility of the Apache C++ Standard Library PMC; and be
    it further

    RESOLVED, that the persons listed immediately below be and hereby
    are appointed to serve as the initial members of the Apache C++
    Standard Library PMC:

    *  Andrew Black <ablack@...>
    *  Anton Pevtsov <apevtsov@...>
    *  Amit Jindal <ajindal@...>
    *  Eric Lemings <elemings@...>
    *  Heidi Buelow <hbuelow@...>
    *  Farid Zaripov <faridz@...>
    *  Justin Erenkrantz <jerenkrantz@...>
    *  Liviu Nicoara <lnicoara@...>
    *  Mark Brown <mbrown@...>
    *  Martin Sebor <sebor@...>
    *  Tim Triemstra <ttriemstra@...>
    *  William A. Rowe, Jr. <wrowe@...>

    NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that Martin Sebor be
    appointed to the office of Vice President, Apache C++ Standard
    Library, to serve in accordance with and subject to the direction
    of the Board of Directors and the Bylaws of the Foundation until
    death, resignation, retirement, removal or disqualification,
    or until a successor is appointed; and be it further

    RESOLVED, that the Apache C++ Standard Library Project be and
    hereby is tasked with the migration and rationalization of the
    Apache C++ Standard Library podling; and be it further

    RESOLVED, that all responsibilities pertaining to the Apache
    C++ Standard Library podling encumbered upon the Apache Incubator
    PMC are hereafter discharged.

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

[Justin Erenkrantz]

On Oct 11, 2007 6:51 PM, Martin Sebor <sebor@...> wrote:

> After over two years in the incubator, two releases under our belt
> (one snapshot and one official release) and a third one coming,
> the stdcxx community with the support of our mentors feel that we
> are ready to propose to the Incubator PMC to graduate stdcxx to
> a Top Level Project. See the following vote thread in the archives:
>
> http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE--ready-to-graduate-tf4386148.html#a12504335
>
> To that end we have prepared the resolution for the Board below
> to be presented for consideration at the upcoming Board meeting.
>
> We invite everyone to vote to approve this proposal.

+1.  -- justin

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

[Stefan Bodewig]

On Thu, 11 Oct 2007, Martin Sebor <sebor@...> wrote:

> We invite everyone to vote to approve this proposal.

+1

Stefan

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

[Bertrand Delacretaz]

On 10/12/07, Martin Sebor <sebor@...> wrote:

> ...We invite everyone to vote to approve this proposal...

+1

-Bertrand

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

[William A. Rowe Jr.]

Martin Sebor wrote:
> After over two years in the incubator, two releases under our belt
> (one snapshot and one official release) and a third one coming,
> the stdcxx community with the support of our mentors feel that we
> are ready to propose to the Incubator PMC to graduate stdcxx to
> a Top Level Project. See the following vote thread in the archives:
>
> http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE--ready-to-graduate-tf4386148.html#a12504335

+1!  Congratulations guys, it's been a long road, but as a Mentor I believe
we are there.  I certainly hope that growth of diversity continues as a TLP
and will hang around as a PMC folk to help ensure that this continues, thou
Martin has my +1 that he will do a good job in continuing to keep this
focused in the ASF spirit.

> To that end we have prepared the resolution for the Board below
> to be presented for consideration at the upcoming Board meeting.
>
> We invite everyone to vote to approve this proposal.

Just one edit;

>    WHEREAS, the Board of Directors deems it to be in the best interests
>    of the Foundation and consistent with the Foundation's purpose to
>    establish a Project, to be known as "Apache C++ Standard Library",

i/and also known by the abbreviation Apache stdcxx,/

>    a portable implementation of the C++ Standard library as specified
>    in ISO/IEC 14882, International Standard for Programming Languages
>    -- C++, for distribution at no charge to the public.

Just ask our mod_python friends what happens if you overlook this in your
resolution ;-P

Bill

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

[robert burrell donkin-2]

On 10/12/07, Martin Sebor <sebor@...> wrote:

> After over two years in the incubator, two releases under our belt
> (one snapshot and one official release) and a third one coming,
> the stdcxx community with the support of our mentors feel that we
> are ready to propose to the Incubator PMC to graduate stdcxx to
> a Top Level Project. See the following vote thread in the archives:
>
> http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE--ready-to-graduate-tf4386148.html#a12504335
>
> To that end we have prepared the resolution for the Board below
> to be presented for consideration at the upcoming Board meeting.
>
> We invite everyone to vote to approve this proposal.

+1

- robert

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

[Noel J. Bergman]

Martin,

After reviewing

> http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE--ready-to-graduate-tf4386148.html#a12504335

I have two issues.  First:

Martin Sebor wrote:

> Bill Rowe wrote:
> > With a caviat - I'd expect the crew to run the next possible release
> > tarball against the RAT tool to make sure every copyright licensing
> > wrinkle has been ironed out.
>
> I'm still cleaning up the license headers on trunk. Once we're
> all satisfied with the result and after we merge trunk to 4.2.0
> I plan to take your suggestion and solicit help from some good
> soul on general@... to run the tool for us (if we're still
> in incubation).

I would like to see the legal stuff resolved first.  I don't believe that we
should release a project with existing copyright issues.  If this were to
mean that stdcxx graduation would wait until November's Board meeting, I'd
be comfortable with that.  How extensive is the issue, and how long will it
take to complete?

My second is simply a question about diversity.  How diverse is the
community at this time?  I did not see any discussion of that in the voting
thread.

        --- Noel



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

[Justin Erenkrantz]

On Oct 13, 2007 12:38 PM, Noel J. Bergman <noel@...> wrote:
> I would like to see the legal stuff resolved first.  I don't believe that we
> should release a project with existing copyright issues.  If this were to
> mean that stdcxx graduation would wait until November's Board meeting, I'd
> be comfortable with that.  How extensive is the issue, and how long will it
> take to complete?

It's not a 'copyright issue' per se (as all the paperwork is in
place), but rather ensuring the license headers follow the currently
recommended template.  Many of our other projects don't follow the
templates - and, yes, this will be a blocker for a release - but I
don't think it needs to hold up graduation.

> My second is simply a question about diversity.  How diverse is the
> community at this time?  I did not see any discussion of that in the voting
> thread.

Besides OtherBill and myself, the core of the community is from two
organizations with RogueWave still being predominate.  There has been
discussions between stdcxx and Tuscany folks about collaborating in
the past - so there is dialogue and receptiveness to new contributors
and organizations.  However, I don't think anything came out of the
Tuscany discussions though.  I think (and hope OtherBill agrees) that
the community is managing itself properly and is open to new
contributors.  I don't see what more stdcxx can learn from the
Incubator.

Like OtherBill, I'll stick around stdcxx for a while to ensure things
go smoothly.  -- justin

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

[Craig L Russell]

On Oct 13, 2007, at 12:38 PM, Noel J. Bergman wrote:

> Martin,
>
> After reviewing
>
>> http://www.nabble.com/-VOTE--ready-to-graduate- 
>> tf4386148.html#a12504335
>
> I have two issues.  First:
>
> Martin Sebor wrote:
>> Bill Rowe wrote:
>>> With a caviat - I'd expect the crew to run the next possible release
>>> tarball against the RAT tool to make sure every copyright licensing
>>> wrinkle has been ironed out.
>>
>> I'm still cleaning up the license headers on trunk. Once we're
>> all satisfied with the result and after we merge trunk to 4.2.0
>> I plan to take your suggestion and solicit help from some good
>> soul on general@... to run the tool for us (if we're still
>> in incubation).
>
> I would like to see the legal stuff resolved first.  I don't  
> believe that we
> should release a project with existing copyright issues.

I have exactly the same concern. The voting took place in July with a  
vague comment to try to run RAT and it's now three months later and...

Has anything further been done on this? When I first found out about  
RAT, it took me all of 10 minutes of internet searching to find out  
what/where/how to run RAT, and another 10 minutes to run it and find  
all the license issues.

So while I'm satisfied that there are no "license issues" with the IP  
in the project, I'm concerned that there are "notice issues"; it's  
not easy for someone downloading the release to understand that the  
IP is clean.

And without me digging through the archives, were any of the notice  
issues raised during the last release review in the incubator?

Craig

> If this were to
> mean that stdcxx graduation would wait until November's Board  
> meeting, I'd
> be comfortable with that.  How extensive is the issue, and how long  
> will it
> take to complete?
>
> My second is simply a question about diversity.  How diverse is the
> community at this time?  I did not see any discussion of that in  
> the voting
> thread.
>
> --- Noel
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...
>

Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@...
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!

[Noel J. Bergman]

Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > I would like to see the legal stuff resolved first.  I don't believe
> > that we should release a project with existing copyright issues.  If
> > this were to mean that stdcxx graduation would wait until November's
> > Board meeting, I'd be comfortable with that.  How extensive is the
> > issue, and how long will it take to complete?

> It's not a 'copyright issue' per se (as all the paperwork is in
> place), but rather ensuring the license headers follow the currently
> recommended template.  Many of our other projects don't follow the
> templates - and, yes, this will be a blocker for a release - but I
> don't think it needs to hold up graduation.

Is it just a matter of the current template versus an older one?  Is
everything properly under at least some form of the ASF license header?  It
seems that it should be a rather straightforward and mechanical item to
clear up.

Considering that clearing IP and ensuring that every things is in correct
order is one of the primary purposes for the Incubator, I don't agree that
something that is a blocker for a release might not reasonably be a blocker
for graduation.  In fact, haven't people called for providing a release
build to be a graduation requirement?

Is there some reason, other than the fact that this is the weekend before
the Board meeting, why this should not simply be fixed?  Is there a race
that needs to be won?  Is November so much worse than October?

> > How diverse is the community at this time?

> Besides OtherBill and myself, the core of the community is from two
> organizations with RogueWave still being predominate.

> I think (and hope OtherBill agrees) that the community is managing
> itself properly and is open to new contributors.

So primarily still RogueWave, but you feel that they are open to others, and
just have rather minimal diversity at this time?

> Like OtherBill, I'll stick around stdcxx for a while to ensure things
> go smoothly.

:-)

        --- Noel



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

[William A. Rowe Jr.]

Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>
> In fact, haven't people called for providing a release
> build to be a graduation requirement?

Yes - I seem to recall that proposition was not made a 'requirement'.

But in answer to your question; *yes* they have performed an incubating-
release and demonstrated that they understand the prerequisites and the
process for conducting a proper ASF release.  RAT is a later addition to
their tool kit which will be deployed even beyond the incubator, to
ensure the package passes all licensing recommendations.

> Is there some reason, other than the fact that this is the weekend before
> the Board meeting, why this should not simply be fixed?  Is there a race
> that needs to be won?  Is November so much worse than October?
>
>>> How diverse is the community at this time?
>
>> Besides OtherBill and myself, the core of the community is from two
>> organizations with RogueWave still being predominate.
>
>> I think (and hope OtherBill agrees) that the community is managing
>> itself properly and is open to new contributors.

Yes, and they have demonstrated this through adopting new committers.

> So primarily still RogueWave, but you feel that they are open to others, and
> just have rather minimal diversity at this time?

Yes; and as the incubator has dropped our standards for diversity far
below what I would consider 'success', but stdcxx certainly *meets* our
current bar.  And I'm 100% convinced that they are open to (and have
proven this already) adopting new committers, as people demonstrate that
they are conversant in the style guidelines, structure of the library
and will work on the dev@ list (and especially through JIRA) to ensure
that their patches are appropriate as committed.

It's not glorious work contributing to a tightly defined standard that
has to work across countless platforms, but I'm certain that as those
who are interested begin to participate, they will be welcomed with
open arms, and Justin and I will hang out to ensure that remains true :)

Anyone interested should consult the project history for the documentation
of the progress they have made with an eye to specific steps that we hope
each project addresses during its incubation;

http://incubator.apache.org/projects/stdcxx

Bill


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

[Noel J. Bergman]

William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> RAT is a later addition to their tool kit

RAT is a tool that attempts to verify compliance.  The things to which RAT verifies compliance are not new, even if RAT is new relative to stdcxx coming into the Incubator.

I feel that we start down a slippery slope when we graduate projects which are "not yet" compliant, but "will be".  When?  Craig points out that it has been some months since the issue was raised by you, and it is still not resolved.  Hence:

> > Is there some reason, other than the fact that this is the weekend before
> > the Board meeting, why this should not simply be fixed?  Is there a race
> > that needs to be won?  Is November so much worse than October?

To which I didn't see you post a dissenting opinion.  Seriously, it is so much to ask that the licensing header be updated, if that's all it is?

> > So primarily still RogueWave, but you feel that they are open
> > to others, and just have rather minimal diversity at this time?

> Yes; and as the incubator has dropped our standards for diversity far
> below what I would consider 'success', but stdcxx certainly *meets* our
> current bar.

If that is the case, fine.  And I am concerned about diversity as a general topic, not limited to any particular project.  Not so much in terms of the openness of a given community, but in terms of reliance on corporate backing.  The less diversity, the more vulnerable to the withdraw of a single corporate entity.

Again, I asked the diversity question because it has been an issue, and I did not see it addressed.  But that's not the one I consider a blocker.

        --- Noel



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

[William A. Rowe Jr.]

Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>
> I feel that we start down a slippery slope when we graduate projects which are "not yet" compliant, but "will be".  When?  Craig points out that it has been some months since the issue was raised by you, and it is still not resolved.  Hence:

So if I'm to understand correctly, you would be satisfied once svn/trunk is shown
to pass the RAT tests?

>>> Is there some reason, other than the fact that this is the weekend before
>>> the Board meeting, why this should not simply be fixed?  Is there a race
>>> that needs to be won?  Is November so much worse than October?
>
> To which I didn't see you post a dissenting opinion.

Why should I extend some dissent?  I already cast my +1 for graduation, and feel it's
actually overdue.  I'm looking forward to the incubator spending more energy directed
at the fledgling (and floundering) efforts which need a great share of our attention.

Bill

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

[Justin Erenkrantz]

On Oct 13, 2007 4:28 PM, Noel J. Bergman <noel@...> wrote:
> I feel that we start down a slippery slope when we graduate projects which are "not yet" compliant, but "will be".  When?  Craig points out that it has been some months since the issue was raised by you, and it is still not resolved.  Hence:

Who said it wasn't compliant?  It is [1] - and it was one of the first
projects to be in compliance in general with the updated licensing
requirements that Cliff drew up.

Your objection is solely about running a tool (which isn't documented
or linked to anywhere) to *prove* the compliance rather than looking
through it yourself - and that has nothing to do with the state of the
community and whether the podling should graduate.

FWIW, I just ran RAT and stdcxx is fine.  RAT is largely flagging the
automated test suite files output as missing the licenses.  These
particular files are used as a comparison so it can't have the license
text anyway or risk screwing up the tests.   IMO, there's nothing here
to warrant vetoing or tabling the graduation vote.  As I said before,
we can (and will) go through it with a fine-tooth comb before the
release; but the state of the licensing notices is comparable with any
other ASF project and graduation doesn't deserve to be held hostage to
some unreasonable expectations.  -- justin

1. Just see http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/stdcxx/trunk/src/strtol.cpp
and others.

---

Summary
-------
Notes: 4
Binaries: 125
Archives: 0
Standards: 2818

Apache Licensed: 2676
Generated Documents: 0

JavaDocs are generated and so license header is optional
Generated files do not required license headers

142 Unknown Licenses

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

[Noel J. Bergman]

Justin Erenkrantz wrote:

> Who said it wasn't compliant?

And I quote again:

==========
Martin Sebor wrote:
> I'm still cleaning up the license headers on trunk. Once we're
> all satisfied with the result and after we merge trunk to 4.2.0
> I plan to take your suggestion and solicit help from some good
> soul on general@... to run the tool for us (if we're still
> in incubation).
==========

If this is *just* about whether or not RAT has been run, that's different.
RAT is a tool to check FOR compliance, not the definition OF compliance.
But Martin's e-mail seemed to say that there are or were issues that he was
working on.  Are they resolved?  If resolved, fine.

> FWIW, I just ran RAT and stdcxx is fine.  RAT is largely flagging the
> automated test suite files output as missing the licenses.

Thank you.  So you are saying that the issues referred to by Martin have
been resolved?  That was my question in the first place.  :-)

        --- Noel



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

[Noel J. Bergman]

William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:

> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > I feel that we start down a slippery slope when we graduate
> > projects which are "not yet" compliant, but "will be".

> So if I'm to understand correctly, you would be satisfied once
> svn/trunk is shown to pass the RAT tests?

I would have been satisfied with an assurance that the issues discussed by you and Martin had been resolved.  Justin has done so.

> I'm looking forward to the incubator spending more energy directed
> at the fledgling (and floundering) efforts which need a great share
> of our attention.

Do you have something specific in mind?  Do you have some list of projects where the Incubator Mentors should be more active?  I would prefer actionable specifics to vague suggestions.

        --- Noel



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

[William A. Rowe Jr.]

Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
>> I'm looking forward to the incubator spending more energy directed
>> at the fledgling (and floundering) efforts which need a great share
>> of our attention.
>
> Do you have something specific in mind?  Do you have some list of projects where
> the Incubator Mentors should be more active?  I would prefer actionable specifics
 > to vague suggestions.

I trust that as VP, Incubator and an active reader of both General and the private
backchannel, and as the collector of all the reports to the board each month, you
know where the most significant problems are.

That said - I hope every podling knows that the IPMC would /love/ to help you
address any open issue that is in your way!  That's why we are here :)

Everyone, please bring things to general@ (or if you have issues discussing
it publicly, then private@ if necessary) and sooner rather than later.  We'll help
you get them resolved to ensure your podling is moving towards graduation without
any hiccups.

And Noel, back to this PMC, you are aware that there is a ton of work to do to
come into compliance with the crypto notification process.  That's not a nice-to-have,
its mandatory that it be resolved ASAP, if not yesterday.

Bill

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

[Leo Simons]

On Oct 12, 2007, at 3:51 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:
> After over two years in the incubator, two releases under our belt
> (one snapshot and one official release) and a third one coming,
> the stdcxx community with the support of our mentors feel that we
> are ready to propose to the Incubator PMC to graduate stdcxx to
> a Top Level Project.

+1!

- Leo, who did dive into community diversity and legal soundness a  
bit before voting


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

[Martin Sebor]

Noel J. Bergman wrote:

> Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>>> I would like to see the legal stuff resolved first.  I don't believe
>>> that we should release a project with existing copyright issues.  If
>>> this were to mean that stdcxx graduation would wait until November's
>>> Board meeting, I'd be comfortable with that.  How extensive is the
>>> issue, and how long will it take to complete?
>
>> It's not a 'copyright issue' per se (as all the paperwork is in
>> place), but rather ensuring the license headers follow the currently
>> recommended template.  Many of our other projects don't follow the
>> templates - and, yes, this will be a blocker for a release - but I
>> don't think it needs to hold up graduation.
>
> Is it just a matter of the current template versus an older one?  Is
> everything properly under at least some form of the ASF license header?  It
> seems that it should be a rather straightforward and mechanical item to
> clear up.

I agree, and I believe these concerns have been addressed. The record
of changes made to resolve this issue can be found here (the specific
patches are referenced in the subtasks):
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STDCXX-552

Martin

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

[Craig L Russell]

+1 for graduation.

Craig

On Oct 14, 2007, at 11:39 AM, Martin Sebor wrote:

> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>> Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
>>> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>>>> I would like to see the legal stuff resolved first.  I don't  
>>>> believe
>>>> that we should release a project with existing copyright  
>>>> issues.  If
>>>> this were to mean that stdcxx graduation would wait until  
>>>> November's
>>>> Board meeting, I'd be comfortable with that.  How extensive is the
>>>> issue, and how long will it take to complete?
>>> It's not a 'copyright issue' per se (as all the paperwork is in
>>> place), but rather ensuring the license headers follow the currently
>>> recommended template.  Many of our other projects don't follow the
>>> templates - and, yes, this will be a blocker for a release - but I
>>> don't think it needs to hold up graduation.
>> Is it just a matter of the current template versus an older one?  Is
>> everything properly under at least some form of the ASF license  
>> header?  It
>> seems that it should be a rather straightforward and mechanical  
>> item to
>> clear up.
>
> I agree, and I believe these concerns have been addressed. The record
> of changes made to resolve this issue can be found here (the specific
> patches are referenced in the subtasks):
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/STDCXX-552
>
> Martin
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...
>

Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@...
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!