Jean must have TinyURL as a bookmarklet :-)
I just looked at the RAT report referenced in [1] and would like to
note a few things. The XML files are generated by Cayenne Modeler and
should not have the license headers. (If Cayenne Modeler
automatically added the license, anyone who created a model in Cayenne
would have the Apache License in their potentially proprietary models,
which they would not like). The DTD and CSS could certainly have the
license added as comments. I'm a little torn on Artist.java, though.
It was initially generated by Cayenne Modeler, but can be customized
by the end-user (will not be overwritten). In this case, Artist.java
does have a little bit of custom code added to it. In the same
directory is also Gallery.java and Painting.java, which also do not
have the license added, but are just shell classes (no methods). We
can add the license to these files (but not to the superclasses), but
I don't know if that is a best Apache practice since the file looks
different than what the modeler would generate (might be slightly
confusing to someone learning Cayenne and looking at the tutorials).
Thoughts?
Thanks,
/dev/mrg
On 11/15/06, Jean T. Anderson <jt..ristowhill.com> wrote:
> Craig L Russell wrote:
> ...
> > I'd suggest you make sure to include a pointer to your release as a
> > proof point that you're really ready to graduate. And it will help to
> > run Robert's RAT detector on the release if you haven't already done.
>
> Robert himself ran RAT [1] :-)
>
> Does anyone spot anything in the status file [2] that needs to be updated?
>
> -jean
>
> [1] http://tinyurl.com/y8gwgv
> [2] http://incubator.apache.org/projects/cayenne.html
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Thu Nov 16 2006 - 09:15:45 EST