From rachelpatel@example.org Sun May 02 11:48:15 2010 Return-Path: <rachelpatel@example.org> Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 3923 invoked from network); 2 May 2010 11:48:14 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 2 May 2010 11:48:14 -0000 Received: (qmail 9105 invoked by uid 500); 2 May 2010 11:48:13 -0000 Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 8848 invoked by uid 500); 2 May 2010 11:48:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact rachelpatel@example.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Post: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Id: <dev.jakarta.apache.org> Reply-To: rachelpatel@example.org Delivered-To: mailing list rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 8840 invoked by uid 99); 2 May 2010 11:48:12 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 02 May 2010 11:48:12 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.2 required=10.0 tests=AWL,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO smtp6.freeserve.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 02 May 2010 11:48:06 +0000 Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [83.161.120.155]) by mwinf3608.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 50D9B700004D for <rachelpatel@example.org>; Sun, 2 May 2010 13:47:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [83.161.120.155]) by mwinf3608.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 44CE87000060 for <rachelpatel@example.org>; Sun, 2 May 2010 13:47:45 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail.homeinbox.net (unknown [83.161.120.155]) by mwinf3608.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 07BD4700004D for <rachelpatel@example.org>; Sun, 2 May 2010 13:47:45 +0200 (CEST) X-ME-UUID: rachelpatel@example.org Received: from localhost (localhost [83.161.120.155]) by mail.homeinbox.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4748632A01 for <rachelpatel@example.org>; Sun, 2 May 2010 12:48:19 +0100 (BST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian rachelpatel@example.org Received: from mail.homeinbox.net ([83.161.120.155]) by localhost (mail.homeinbox.net [83.161.120.155]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id lDwGkhqZQy8h for <rachelpatel@example.org>; Sun, 2 May 2010 12:48:14 +0100 (BST) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (study03.dev.local [83.161.120.155]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.homeinbox.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5111F329FE for <rachelpatel@example.org>; Sun, 2 May 2010 12:48:14 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <rachelpatel@example.org> Date: Sun, 02 May 2010 12:47:36 +0100 From: Mark Thomas <rachelpatel@example.org> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.2; en-GB; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20100317 Thunderbird/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rachelpatel@example.org Subject: [BCEL] Potential licensing issue with GSoC contribution of Java 5 support X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit As you may be aware, Apache Tomcat is using a packaged renamed copy of BCEL to implement the annotation scanning neccessary for the Servlet 3.0 implementation. As part of a recent release review, concerns were raised over two files that originated in BCEL. [1], [2] These files are CPL licensed and may not [3] be included in ASF releases in source form. I have managed to track down the Andy Clements listed as the original author in the header of those files. By chance, he now works for the company as me (SpringSource/VMWare). As best I can tell, the history of the files is: a) BCEL didn't support Java 5 b) AspectJ was using BCEL c) AspectJ needed Java 5 support d) Andy added Java 5 support to AspectJ's copy of BCEL in November 2004. eg [5] e) The 2006 GSoC student contacted Andy for advice on how to add Java 5 support to BCEL f) Andy replied "Why bother? I've already done it" and never heard from the student again g) Java 5 support was added to BCEL Comparing [1] and [5], apart from the package names, the files are byte for byte identical. It therefore looks highly likely that the Java 5 implementation for BCEL was implemented, at least in part, by copying the files from AspectJ. I checked a small number of the other changes made as part of this GSoC project. Some look OK (eg [6]) whereas some look suspicious - for example by changing names of constants from those used in BCEL to match those used in AspectJ [7]. I will enquire if Andy is a) in a position to be able to and b) willing to license his AspectJ modifications for BCEL under the AL2 or any other license [8] that would allow BCEL to continue to include these changes. There is a reasonable degree of urgency about resolving this issue since it is currently blocking the imminent Tomcat 7 release. Mark [1] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jakarta/bcel/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/bcel/classfile/EnclosingMethod.java [2] https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jakarta/bcel/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/bcel/classfile/LocalVariableTypeTable.java [3] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b [4] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=411580 [5] http://dev.eclipse.org/viewcvs/index.cgi/org.aspectj/modules/bcel-builder/src/org/aspectj/apache/bcel/classfile/EnclosingMethod.java?revision=1.1&root=Tools_Project&view=markup [6] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/jakarta/bcel/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/bcel/classfile/RuntimeInvisibleAnnotations.java?r1=411580&r2=411579&pathrev=411580 [7] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/jakarta/bcel/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/bcel/Constants.java?r1=411580&r2=411579&pathrev=411580 [8] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-a From rachelpatel@example.org Sun May 02 14:48:39 2010 Return-Path: <rachelpatel@example.org> Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 34890 invoked from network); 2 May 2010 14:48:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 2 May 2010 14:48:39 -0000 Received: (qmail 96938 invoked by uid 500); 2 May 2010 14:48:38 -0000 Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 96811 invoked by uid 500); 2 May 2010 14:48:38 -0000 Mailing-List: contact rachelpatel@example.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Post: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Id: <dev.jakarta.apache.org> Reply-To: rachelpatel@example.org Delivered-To: mailing list rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 96803 invoked by uid 99); 2 May 2010 14:48:38 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 02 May 2010 14:48:38 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.4 required=10.0 tests=AWL,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of rachelpatel@example.org designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-vw0-f44.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 02 May 2010 14:48:32 +0000 Received: by vws13 with SMTP id 13so1228463vws.31 for <rachelpatel@example.org>; Sun, 02 May 2010 07:48:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=NcNsrUQADWICJ2KvAf3YC6Fad7RrUbzDOh5J1Tlkr18=; b=BOFhwxHmQ64ULD3nhkAZn6Q4DKAUTfGWkv6j1U5GKcZWsJxho1iL+KZvrEpALCk554 cQFLEXTA+t3acw5gZRpc28YYMURlVdhMyNmQdbuRSVbLndQGgSx68t37YJShlst+Xj2Z E7Vqg09wkbBRtW/LNujiNw70gHTJkAhazJ2tg= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=uFnJex+H45lh1pr5WPXm9N/8vmOJrtSVPYdGh8mgm+zrgcJmlF85FDHfh+s8RL+Tmv /0yX17cOMCiv0hjpWc0RdGUNV2Fhk2t79ghgUSlZKjFiRnP/fgBNL0asnmYsj9auLQ++ auqIlUriKMfpd0yrabhiJNduMoNycad0/9gbs= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id c14mr547251vcx.230.1272811692050; Sun, 02 May 2010 07:48:12 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Sun, 2 May 2010 07:48:11 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <rachelpatel@example.org> References: <rachelpatel@example.org> Date: Sun, 2 May 2010 10:48:11 -0400 Message-ID: <rachelpatel@example.org> Subject: Re: [BCEL] Potential licensing issue with GSoC contribution of Java 5 support From: Rahul Akolkar <rachelpatel@example.org> To: rachelpatel@example.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Sun, May 2, 2010 at 7:47 AM, Mark Thomas <rachelpatel@example.org> wrote: > As you may be aware, Apache Tomcat is using a packaged renamed copy of > BCEL to implement the annotation scanning neccessary for the Servlet 3.0 > implementation. As part of a recent release review, concerns were raised > over two files that originated in BCEL. [1], [2] > > These files are CPL licensed and may not [3] be included in ASF releases > in source form. > > I have managed to track down the Andy Clements listed as the original > author in the header of those files. By chance, he now works for the > company as me (SpringSource/VMWare). > > As best I can tell, the history of the files is: > a) BCEL didn't support Java 5 > b) AspectJ was using BCEL > c) AspectJ needed Java 5 support > d) Andy added Java 5 support to AspectJ's copy of BCEL in November 2004. > eg [5] > e) The 2006 GSoC student contacted Andy for advice on how to add Java 5 > support to BCEL > f) Andy replied "Why bother? I've already done it" and never heard from > the student again > g) Java 5 support was added to BCEL > > Comparing [1] and [5], apart from the package names, the files are byte > for byte identical. It therefore looks highly likely that the Java 5 > implementation for BCEL was implemented, at least in part, by copying > the files from AspectJ. > > I checked a small number of the other changes made as part of this GSoC > project. Some look OK (eg [6]) whereas some look suspicious - for > example by changing names of constants from those used in BCEL to match > those used in AspectJ [7]. > > I will enquire if Andy is a) in a position to be able to and b) willing > to license his AspectJ modifications for BCEL under the AL2 or any other > license [8] that would allow BCEL to continue to include these changes. > <snip/> That'd be great. Thanks for looking into this. -Rahul > There is a reasonable degree of urgency about resolving this issue since > it is currently blocking the imminent Tomcat 7 release. > > Mark > > > [1] > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jakarta/bcel/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/bcel/classfile/EnclosingMethod.java > [2] > https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/jakarta/bcel/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/bcel/classfile/LocalVariableTypeTable.java > [3] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b > [4] http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?view=revision&revision=411580 > [5] > http://dev.eclipse.org/viewcvs/index.cgi/org.aspectj/modules/bcel-builder/src/org/aspectj/apache/bcel/classfile/EnclosingMethod.java?revision=1.1&root=Tools_Project&view=markup > [6] > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/jakarta/bcel/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/bcel/classfile/RuntimeInvisibleAnnotations.java?r1=411580&r2=411579&pathrev=411580 > [7] > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/jakarta/bcel/trunk/src/main/java/org/apache/bcel/Constants.java?r1=411580&r2=411579&pathrev=411580 > [8] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-a > > > From rachelpatel@example.org Mon May 03 07:42:32 2010 Return-Path: <rachelpatel@example.org> Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 90004 invoked from network); 3 May 2010 07:42:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 3 May 2010 07:42:31 -0000 Received: (qmail 48766 invoked by uid 500); 3 May 2010 07:42:31 -0000 Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 48352 invoked by uid 500); 3 May 2010 07:42:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact rachelpatel@example.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Post: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Id: <dev.jakarta.apache.org> Reply-To: rachelpatel@example.org Delivered-To: mailing list rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 48344 invoked by uid 99); 3 May 2010 07:42:29 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 03 May 2010 07:42:29 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.1 required=10.0 tests=AWL,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-ew0-f214.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 03 May 2010 07:42:22 +0000 Received: by ewy6 with SMTP id 6so566021ewy.12 for <rachelpatel@example.org>; Mon, 03 May 2010 00:42:00 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id a14mr5676115ebp.10.1272872520349; Mon, 03 May 2010 00:42:00 -0700 (PDT) Sender: rachelpatel@example.org Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Mon, 3 May 2010 00:42:00 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <rachelpatel@example.org> References: <rachelpatel@example.org> <rachelpatel@example.org> Date: Mon, 3 May 2010 09:42:00 +0200 X-Google-Sender-Auth: 35707b7f8054a1d1 Message-ID: <rachelpatel@example.org> Subject: Re: [BCEL] Potential licensing issue with GSoC contribution of Java 5 support From: Torsten Curdt <rachelpatel@example.org> To: rachelpatel@example.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 >> e) The 2006 GSoC student contacted Andy for advice on how to add Java 5 >> support to BCEL >> f) Andy replied "Why bother? I've already done it" and never heard from >> the student again >> g) Java 5 support was added to BCEL Bah! I've explicitly told the student that copying code is not acceptable. Thanks for catching this. (How did you?) I hope Andy can work something out. cheers -- Torsten From rachelpatel@example.org Mon May 03 11:38:41 2010 Return-Path: <rachelpatel@example.org> Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 25596 invoked from network); 3 May 2010 11:38:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 3 May 2010 11:38:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 25578 invoked by uid 500); 3 May 2010 11:38:39 -0000 Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 25406 invoked by uid 500); 3 May 2010 11:38:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact rachelpatel@example.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Post: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Id: <dev.jakarta.apache.org> Reply-To: rachelpatel@example.org Delivered-To: mailing list rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 25398 invoked by uid 99); 3 May 2010 11:38:38 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 03 May 2010 11:38:38 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of rachelpatel@example.org designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-pz0-f182.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 03 May 2010 11:38:29 +0000 Received: by pzk12 with SMTP id 12so1334583pzk.32 for <rachelpatel@example.org>; Mon, 03 May 2010 04:38:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:content-type:mime-version :subject:from:in-reply-to:date:content-transfer-encoding:message-id :references:to:x-mailer; bh=q9KHAh9D/6a4dnu9/tKgTChaJqAwCR392q1+F7+YNpA=; b=uzl4juvCsDRy+HqZZ+RVm/+aiTfDezdMLNUDlSwXvPOZ5+whgmjJQXmPGu/B+N8SOV cIJXYO8MnwEOxVJ+cvRkx2rfvmlMab2dx2/ZnwOVJ+PUq5SXjaEIeVhpiH4NZnYYnCwR +jU/AuRQX+l8i7VJVWwoWWEzMgHtzIgUCi9gk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; b=eE5FD12na2E+xbdo5Fx9DlRrJ7V1Tonw6g/pDQLWv1mS6CqZlo01Xrzaz1twV2RpFd liN9GSZlPwnddxtiPLSgwVlsOYZLMd1qGgEeoR2WZhYLZ0Zlv3S2PViUkpc7+z8hpfxs mSnbeJtAoEIEWtl7H5ZVy5hirmgPdm8f2Q9Mk= Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id l16mr15175069waf.87.1272886688611; Mon, 03 May 2010 04:38:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [83.161.120.155] ([83.161.120.155]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id v13sm24157951wav.14.283.161.120.155.38.06 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Mon, 03 May 2010 04:38:07 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1078) Subject: Re: [BCEL] Potential licensing issue with GSoC contribution of Java 5 support From: Kevan Miller <rachelpatel@example.org> In-Reply-To: <rachelpatel@example.org> Date: Mon, 3 May 2010 07:38:05 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <rachelpatel@example.org> References: <rachelpatel@example.org> <rachelpatel@example.org> <rachelpatel@example.org> To: rachelpatel@example.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1078) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On May 3, 2010, at 3:42 AM, Torsten Curdt wrote: >>> e) The 2006 GSoC student contacted Andy for advice on how to add = Java 5 >>> support to BCEL >>> f) Andy replied "Why bother? I've already done it" and never heard = from >>> the student again >>> g) Java 5 support was added to BCEL >=20 > Bah! I've explicitly told the student that copying code is not = acceptable. > Thanks for catching this. (How did you?) The source code in question is CPL licensed. The student (properly) left = the file under the CPL license. So, the source files do not contain an = Apache source license header. A Geronimo release review flagged the files as a potential problem. Once = we identified the licensing issue, the source was backtracked from = Geronimo to Tomcat and then to BCEL... --kevan= From rachelpatel@example.org Mon May 03 21:30:41 2010 Return-Path: <rachelpatel@example.org> Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 14054 invoked from network); 3 May 2010 21:30:40 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 3 May 2010 21:30:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 48887 invoked by uid 500); 3 May 2010 21:30:40 -0000 Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 48780 invoked by uid 500); 3 May 2010 21:30:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact rachelpatel@example.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Post: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Id: <dev.jakarta.apache.org> Reply-To: rachelpatel@example.org Delivered-To: mailing list rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 48772 invoked by uid 99); 3 May 2010 21:30:39 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 03 May 2010 21:30:39 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO smtp6.freeserve.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 03 May 2010 21:30:30 +0000 Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [83.161.120.155]) by mwinf3541.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id A04851C025F1 for <rachelpatel@example.org>; Mon, 3 May 2010 23:30:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from me-wanadoo.net (localhost [83.161.120.155]) by mwinf3541.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 91FE01C025F6 for <rachelpatel@example.org>; Mon, 3 May 2010 23:30:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from mail.homeinbox.net (unknown [83.161.120.155]) by mwinf3541.me.freeserve.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 544411C025F1 for <rachelpatel@example.org>; Mon, 3 May 2010 23:30:10 +0200 (CEST) X-ME-UUID: rachelpatel@example.org Received: from localhost (localhost [83.161.120.155]) by mail.homeinbox.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id EC6EE32A11 for <rachelpatel@example.org>; Mon, 3 May 2010 22:30:45 +0100 (BST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian rachelpatel@example.org Received: from mail.homeinbox.net ([83.161.120.155]) by localhost (mail.homeinbox.net [83.161.120.155]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id HJnyAYwouQ4q for <rachelpatel@example.org>; Mon, 3 May 2010 22:30:42 +0100 (BST) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (study03.dev.local [83.161.120.155]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.homeinbox.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3BDE5329EB for <rachelpatel@example.org>; Mon, 3 May 2010 22:30:42 +0100 (BST) Message-ID: <rachelpatel@example.org> Date: Mon, 03 May 2010 22:30:01 +0100 From: Mark Thomas <rachelpatel@example.org> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.2; en-GB; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20100317 Thunderbird/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rachelpatel@example.org Subject: Re: [BCEL] Potential licensing issue with GSoC contribution of Java 5 support References: <rachelpatel@example.org> <rachelpatel@example.org> <rachelpatel@example.org> <rachelpatel@example.org> In-Reply-To: <rachelpatel@example.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On 03/05/2010 12:38, Kevan Miller wrote: > > On May 3, 2010, at 3:42 AM, Torsten Curdt wrote: > >>>> e) The 2006 GSoC student contacted Andy for advice on how to add Java 5 >>>> support to BCEL >>>> f) Andy replied "Why bother? I've already done it" and never heard from >>>> the student again >>>> g) Java 5 support was added to BCEL >> >> Bah! I've explicitly told the student that copying code is not acceptable. >> Thanks for catching this. (How did you?) > > The source code in question is CPL licensed. The student (properly) left the file under the CPL license. So, the source files do not contain an Apache source license header. > > A Geronimo release review flagged the files as a potential problem. Once we identified the licensing issue, the source was backtracked from Geronimo to Tomcat and then to BCEL... Good news. Bad news. I have spoken to Andy Clements (the original author) and he is willing to re-license to the AL v2. Unfortunately, when he wrote the BCEL changes that were incorporated into AspectJ he was working for IBM and IBM owns the copyright. Andy no longer works for IBM. The options before BCEL can do another release are: - approach IBM and ask then to agree to re-license Andy's work on BCEL to the ALv2 - review the GSoC contribution and revert anything copied from AspectJ and then re-implement the msising pieces - something else? Kevan works for IBM and has offered to help out in resolving this issue. I think it is time for me to pass the baton on this one to Kevan. I'll lurk on the Jakarta dev and pmc lists until this is resolved but I'm not expecting to take much of an active role at this point. Mark From rachelpatel@example.org Thu May 06 15:26:38 2010 Return-Path: <rachelpatel@example.org> Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 66643 invoked from network); 6 May 2010 15:26:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 6 May 2010 15:26:38 -0000 Received: (qmail 28212 invoked by uid 500); 6 May 2010 15:26:37 -0000 Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 28140 invoked by uid 500); 6 May 2010 15:26:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact rachelpatel@example.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Post: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Id: <dev.jakarta.apache.org> Reply-To: rachelpatel@example.org Delivered-To: mailing list rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 28126 invoked by uid 99); 6 May 2010 15:26:37 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 May 2010 15:26:37 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=AWL,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of rachelpatel@example.org designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-ww0-f44.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 May 2010 15:26:29 +0000 Received: by wwb18 with SMTP id 18so44042wwb.31 for <rachelpatel@example.org>; Thu, 06 May 2010 08:26:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:content-type:mime-version :subject:from:in-reply-to:date:content-transfer-encoding:message-id :references:to:x-mailer; bh=ubnrYRSy5mFx6rZlC/4l6Y1alLNYWpezFmB5V0skD2I=; b=EgVHgDsvWLIXAIkEjHQ/ubSnuz+BOcSgOGHo56MDFQRlJXYWz9KbSK2cNZOZceTcIL 9RKJI2fQjNLvBmb+ZALjsMsDLiDuc4MLUfop3Dg3NJCOVST4/2kT2TygBrH0MwxmWK6b 8rNDCRE5H+Def6aerC+/+5q1VOPZft7kNktrc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer; b=kNrIDeKPbHOQJK1BEyRcZ++bX3iBIjoRoE72AhrTFr/Q10m9SM7EHfVCePvw692MB8 +eXVRbzxjuuZyxXUXuPat/nptIiTTblwPCC5Wa6vtb6lyuV/4yZ8ZZJ2oOrzBGfMFAhM jQrbYWaAe4mF/Px13RGrzE16iHQ0VqrygCWK8= Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id d48mr3136378wef.199.1273159567812; Thu, 06 May 2010 08:26:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [83.161.120.155] ([83.161.120.155]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id g66sm558591wej.1.283.161.120.155.26.05 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Thu, 06 May 2010 08:26:06 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1078) Subject: Re: [BCEL] Potential licensing issue with GSoC contribution of Java 5 support From: Kevan Miller <rachelpatel@example.org> In-Reply-To: <rachelpatel@example.org> Date: Thu, 6 May 2010 11:25:59 -0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <rachelpatel@example.org> References: <rachelpatel@example.org> <rachelpatel@example.org> <rachelpatel@example.org> <rachelpatel@example.org> <rachelpatel@example.org> To: rachelpatel@example.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1078) On May 3, 2010, at 5:30 PM, Mark Thomas wrote: >=20 > Kevan works for IBM and has offered to help out in resolving this = issue. > I think it is time for me to pass the baton on this one to Kevan. I've created Bug 49259 and attached AL2 licensed versions of the = problematic files.=20 As Mark has noted, I work for IBM. The 1.1 versions of these files were = committed to the Eclipse AspectJ project by Andy Clement while he was an = IBM employee. Since IBM is the copyright holder for the 1.1 version of = these files, I am relicensing them under AL2. Let me know if you have any questions.=20 --kevan= From rachelpatel@example.org Thu May 06 15:35:11 2010 Return-Path: <rachelpatel@example.org> Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 69815 invoked from network); 6 May 2010 15:35:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 6 May 2010 15:35:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 47062 invoked by uid 500); 6 May 2010 15:35:11 -0000 Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 46992 invoked by uid 500); 6 May 2010 15:35:11 -0000 Mailing-List: contact rachelpatel@example.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Post: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Id: <dev.jakarta.apache.org> Reply-To: rachelpatel@example.org Delivered-To: mailing list rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 46984 invoked by uid 99); 6 May 2010 15:35:11 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 May 2010 15:35:11 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of rachelpatel@example.org designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-vw0-f44.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 May 2010 15:35:03 +0000 Received: by vws9 with SMTP id 9so78877vws.31 for <rachelpatel@example.org>; Thu, 06 May 2010 08:34:42 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=bLTXvSZoeRvp1fTmFhZvSVKJoxIyCHimrFzQ7RybNK8=; b=Kthwmo5y2b/BEo8cH5+KL7f9IWYXWzav7D6f1MeXiffEv+TcxajCabNSi9NvtgdIG2 8tNxcbKrn7Yi9UTYmiZB+YEz88bqua3EV4ei9EzCO7TW1eMWgR1aK+UPM7/0O+aeUSCI pAo5eRA7LemYL8ccCe1ckmtCoZQnXV0j/AwC0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=Opxc30Qg7JKlC1zQhZPVkhD2EvSlkyURGMY4o/B2pv4CvIxWiDMGmnNU3KGQydwzId 4fwXb1PPhgcpY8P+Hk3twTTW4m28P2+n3qfYSBIXmWmESuYuYnkc0uvtk5sFrqZn/kP/ /oMskjGS7Urfcbe1gCVwUEUvg+Gkbvzrag3aw= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id u16mr3176413vcr.108.1273160082320; Thu, 06 May 2010 08:34:42 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Thu, 6 May 2010 08:34:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <rachelpatel@example.org> References: <rachelpatel@example.org> <rachelpatel@example.org> <rachelpatel@example.org> <rachelpatel@example.org> <rachelpatel@example.org> <rachelpatel@example.org> Date: Thu, 6 May 2010 11:34:42 -0400 Message-ID: <rachelpatel@example.org> Subject: Re: [BCEL] Potential licensing issue with GSoC contribution of Java 5 support From: Rahul Akolkar <rachelpatel@example.org> To: rachelpatel@example.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 11:25 AM, Kevan Miller <rachelpatel@example.org> wrot= e: > > On May 3, 2010, at 5:30 PM, Mark Thomas wrote: >> >> Kevan works for IBM and has offered to help out in resolving this issue. >> I think it is time for me to pass the baton on this one to Kevan. > > I've created Bug 49259 and attached AL2 licensed versions of the problema= tic files. > > As Mark has noted, I work for IBM. The 1.1 versions of these files were c= ommitted to the Eclipse AspectJ project by Andy Clement while he was an IBM= employee. Since IBM is the copyright holder for the 1.1 version of these f= iles, I am relicensing them under AL2. > > Let me know if you have any questions. > <snip/> Thanks Kevan. If none of the BCEL devs commit the attached versions in a few days, I will do so. -Rahul > --kevan From rachelpatel@example.org Thu May 06 17:06:59 2010 Return-Path: <rachelpatel@example.org> Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 93710 invoked from network); 6 May 2010 17:06:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 6 May 2010 17:06:58 -0000 Received: (qmail 16304 invoked by uid 500); 6 May 2010 17:06:58 -0000 Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 16227 invoked by uid 500); 6 May 2010 17:06:58 -0000 Mailing-List: contact rachelpatel@example.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Post: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Id: <dev.jakarta.apache.org> Reply-To: rachelpatel@example.org Delivered-To: mailing list rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 16219 invoked by uid 99); 6 May 2010 17:06:58 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 May 2010 17:06:58 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.7 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 May 2010 17:06:49 +0000 Received: from know-smtpout-4.server.virginmedia.net ([83.161.120.155]) by mtaout01-winn.ispmail.ntl.com (InterMail vM.83.161.120.155 201-2186-134-20080326) with ESMTP id <rachelpatel@example.org> for <rachelpatel@example.org>; Thu, 6 May 2010 18:06:25 +0100 Received: from [83.161.120.155] (helo=s2laptop.local) by know-smtpout-4.server.virginmedia.net with esmtpa (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from <rachelpatel@example.org>) id 1OA4Wj-0000fT-HY for rachelpatel@example.org; Thu, 06 May 2010 18:06:21 +0100 Message-ID: <rachelpatel@example.org> Date: Thu, 06 May 2010 18:06:20 +0100 From: Mark Thomas <rachelpatel@example.org> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; en-US; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20100317 Thunderbird/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rachelpatel@example.org Subject: Re: [BCEL] Potential licensing issue with GSoC contribution of Java 5 support References: <rachelpatel@example.org> <rachelpatel@example.org> <rachelpatel@example.org> <rachelpatel@example.org> <rachelpatel@example.org> <rachelpatel@example.org> <rachelpatel@example.org> In-Reply-To: <rachelpatel@example.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Cloudmark-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=W3tOLUehizD4qj6VhtReFuw5MKb8d+XqjIxlDsIazEA= c=1 sm=0 a=4G8b3dBW9D4A:10 a=8nJEP1OIZ-IA:10 a=pGLkceISAAAA:8 a=J0DZ0dn4WdMakUjiIqEA:9 a=5Gnp_pbAp649LLpraMgA:7 a=kdh5mO9l6388QWJYd70loo9wwGoA:4 a=wPNLvfGTeEIA:10 a=MSl-tDqOz04A:10 a=HpAAvcLHHh0Zw7uRqdWCyQ==:117 On 06/05/2010 16:34, Rahul Akolkar wrote: > On Thu, May 6, 2010 at 11:25 AM, Kevan Miller<rachelpatel@example.org> wrote: >> >> On May 3, 2010, at 5:30 PM, Mark Thomas wrote: >>> >>> Kevan works for IBM and has offered to help out in resolving this issue. >>> I think it is time for me to pass the baton on this one to Kevan. >> >> I've created Bug 49259 and attached AL2 licensed versions of the problematic files. >> >> As Mark has noted, I work for IBM. The 1.1 versions of these files were committed to the Eclipse AspectJ project by Andy Clement while he was an IBM employee. Since IBM is the copyright holder for the 1.1 version of these files, I am relicensing them under AL2. >> >> Let me know if you have any questions. >> > <snip/> > > Thanks Kevan. If none of the BCEL devs commit the attached versions in > a few days, I will do so. Many, many thanks Kevan. I am amazed at how quickly you were able to get this sorted. Please pass on my heartfelt thanks to all those at IBM that helped you resolve this so quickly. I will commit those files - with an appropriately long commit message - later this evening with the port to Tomcat 7 following shortly thereafter. Thanks again, Mark From rachelpatel@example.org Thu May 06 17:40:52 2010 Return-Path: <rachelpatel@example.org> Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 2019 invoked from network); 6 May 2010 17:40:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 6 May 2010 17:40:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 72755 invoked by uid 500); 6 May 2010 17:40:50 -0000 Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 72683 invoked by uid 500); 6 May 2010 17:40:50 -0000 Mailing-List: contact rachelpatel@example.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Post: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Id: <dev.jakarta.apache.org> Reply-To: rachelpatel@example.org Delivered-To: mailing list rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 72675 invoked by uid 99); 6 May 2010 17:40:50 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 May 2010 17:40:50 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO msw2.pinnacle.net) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 May 2010 17:40:43 +0000 Received: from eugbbohub1wp.eu.insurance.corp (eugbbosmt1wp.pinnacle.co.uk) by msw2.pinnacle.net (Clearswift SMTPRS 5.2.9) with ESMTP id <rachelpatel@example.org> for <rachelpatel@example.org>; Thu, 6 May 2010 18:40:13 +0100 Subject: Charnjit BHULLAR is out of the office. From: rachelpatel@example.org To: rachelpatel@example.org Message-ID: <rachelpatel@example.org> Date: Thu, 6 May 2010 18:40:17 +0100 X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on LTNSUBSMTP001/SERVERS/SMTP(652FP1HF147|September 14, 2005) at 06/05/2010 18:40:05 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org I will be out of the office starting 06/05/2010 and will not return until 07/05/2010. Hi, I am on annual leave and will respond to your e-mail upon my return, if the query is of an urgent nature then please contact my manager James McMullen. Thank you. ****************************************** CONFIDENTIALITY. This e-mail and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the named recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to another person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Any views expressed in this message are those of the individual sender, except where the sender specifically states them to be the views of Pinnacle Insurance Plc, registered in England and Wales number 1007798. Registered Office: Pinnacle House, A1 Barnet Way, Borehamwood, Herts WD6 2XX. VAT Reg No. GB629 3452 28. If you have received this e-mail in error please immediately notify us on 803.425.1622. This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses. www.mimesweeper.com ****************************************** From rachelpatel@example.org Fri May 14 16:42:37 2010 Return-Path: <rachelpatel@example.org> Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 96061 invoked from network); 14 May 2010 16:42:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 14 May 2010 16:42:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 41447 invoked by uid 500); 14 May 2010 16:42:36 -0000 Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 41372 invoked by uid 500); 14 May 2010 16:42:36 -0000 Mailing-List: contact rachelpatel@example.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Post: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Id: <dev.jakarta.apache.org> Reply-To: rachelpatel@example.org Delivered-To: mailing list rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 41364 invoked by uid 500); 14 May 2010 16:42:36 -0000 Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 41361 invoked by uid 99); 14 May 2010 16:42:35 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 14 May 2010 16:42:35 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.4 required=10.0 tests=AWL,FREEMAIL_FROM,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of rachelpatel@example.org designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-fx0-f44.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 14 May 2010 16:42:29 +0000 Received: by fxm16 with SMTP id 16so1398839fxm.31 for <rachelpatel@example.org>; Fri, 14 May 2010 09:42:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:date:message-id :subject:from:to:content-type; bh=s2rJMkVH9SsglKjEHM2T3tDhqTo2SejKLPKu4ceA0vg=; b=N26IvIuoNenh6lxxUOD5Bb3lsuCoza3wmehqUYGzaWC/+TPZEIe2yxyjwxDNIuYFfP 9q2lXM290zYPo0eytfb2MKu0Yt7crVZY4Sm/wQseKmGBk2k5HFufY4d7w9MrJr8bePQj fBLqIT3aNWaR94FsvVrO3OzD0Sg/Ja2+dfqCs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; b=k656fCD3LFQX4HtEE6kUwtY7QA6u9CI1TVQzA3wHJedjdKP4qzSB1sN1d4jjtqX2cW 1e26a6jzAAZtpKYm5jQvaf6f/tNnjeCdB5vhWYjHLkDouNKbBCYA8YBEcCUPgSU6pK1+ SSQF0KLJhvgLwkE7Cwp38/L9aEpn5kNPulVek= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id f3mr150486hbh.161.1273855328081; Fri, 14 May 2010 09:42:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Fri, 14 May 2010 09:42:08 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 17:42:08 +0100 Message-ID: <rachelpatel@example.org> Subject: Release BSF 3.1 ? From: sebb <rachelpatel@example.org> To: Bean Scripting Framework developers <rachelpatel@example.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 There have been a few changes to the BSF 3.x code line since 3.0. I think it would be good to release version 3.1 along with its Maven version. I've asked for Nexus access for BSF 3.x, so I propose to use that for staging/voting on the Maven artifacts. I'm happy to manage the release, unless anyone else wants to do it. Comments? --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org For additional commands, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org From rachelpatel@example.org Fri May 14 17:46:24 2010 Return-Path: <rachelpatel@example.org> Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 11900 invoked from network); 14 May 2010 17:46:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 14 May 2010 17:46:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 36996 invoked by uid 500); 14 May 2010 17:46:23 -0000 Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 36883 invoked by uid 500); 14 May 2010 17:46:23 -0000 Mailing-List: contact rachelpatel@example.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Post: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Id: <dev.jakarta.apache.org> Reply-To: rachelpatel@example.org Delivered-To: mailing list rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 36875 invoked by uid 99); 14 May 2010 17:46:23 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 14 May 2010 17:46:23 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of rachelpatel@example.org designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-qy0-f200.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 14 May 2010 17:46:15 +0000 Received: by qyk38 with SMTP id 38so1671576qyk.17 for <rachelpatel@example.org>; Fri, 14 May 2010 10:45:54 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=1ThxlfRgmRoCMEOIcymUyl2iUlYkW/Fs457TbWUicZg=; b=s3ya2HYvYrhBWC4+iURDVsYsqwpPRhwU6vc7P4Tzan3o7JQx0oHdGZFS6K2B1mBZL6 RWlLkN7b12oq4VtZ5rZPgafQoZLO0X5JxLqBQKzSsx/9bcilsK/BOBgOC2MWVOQcM1dv Oy7wTUp5pQkeq36PqvjJW3eXaD/jWZNqUgUrs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=eFxa5kQWjIYfGegBcBzQPQd3I1NICaO06ymi2sdGBRNl9aGZYArgaTtprw+agKlGeM 2NdV2KSW/ZeRZAzmIxHGmn8JpNw3aHl/YQeYR1LDNxP8JoXi6V3TZEnr0dJ621jy2AdR 2K3MYI7StZs9QxusvJgEtAPqxWs0xnAfzO7Pw= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id t1mr859930qaf.16.1273859154578; Fri, 14 May 2010 10:45:54 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Fri, 14 May 2010 10:45:54 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <rachelpatel@example.org> References: <rachelpatel@example.org> Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 13:45:54 -0400 Message-ID: <rachelpatel@example.org> Subject: Re: Release BSF 3.1 ? From: Rahul Akolkar <rachelpatel@example.org> To: rachelpatel@example.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Fri, May 14, 2010 at 12:42 PM, sebb <rachelpatel@example.org> wrote: > There have been a few changes to the BSF 3.x code line since 3.0. > > I think it would be good to release version 3.1 along with its Maven version. > > I've asked for Nexus access for BSF 3.x, so I propose to use that for > staging/voting on the Maven artifacts. > > I'm happy to manage the release, unless anyone else wants to do it. > > Comments? > <snip/> Sounds good. -Rahul --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org For additional commands, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org From rachelpatel@example.org Fri May 14 23:24:12 2010 Return-Path: <rachelpatel@example.org> Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 7961 invoked from network); 14 May 2010 23:24:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 14 May 2010 23:24:11 -0000 Received: (qmail 91089 invoked by uid 500); 14 May 2010 23:24:11 -0000 Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 90974 invoked by uid 500); 14 May 2010 23:24:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact rachelpatel@example.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Post: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Id: <dev.jakarta.apache.org> Reply-To: rachelpatel@example.org Delivered-To: mailing list rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 90966 invoked by uid 99); 14 May 2010 23:24:10 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 14 May 2010 23:24:10 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of rachelpatel@example.org designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail.gmx.net) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Fri, 14 May 2010 23:24:01 +0000 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 14 May 2010 23:23:41 -0000 Received: from user-12lcjsk.cable.mindspring.com (EHLO tonimac.local) [83.161.120.155] by mail.gmx.net (mp072) with SMTP; 15 May 2010 01:23:41 +0200 X-Authenticated: #22961642 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19pO0ZNQCNpr+QU+akaCG16YTCVmhfoeWFlZQ4IJS p+zC0KEoaPE9Fs Message-ID: <rachelpatel@example.org> Date: Fri, 14 May 2010 19:23:40 -0400 From: Antoine Levy-Lambert <rachelpatel@example.org> User-Agent: Thunderbird 83.161.120.155 (Macintosh/20100228) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rachelpatel@example.org Subject: Re: Release BSF 3.1 ? References: <rachelpatel@example.org> In-Reply-To: <rachelpatel@example.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.96.0 OpenPGP: id=265B4C63 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org sebb wrote: > There have been a few changes to the BSF 3.x code line since 3.0. > > I think it would be good to release version 3.1 along with its Maven version. > > I've asked for Nexus access for BSF 3.x, so I propose to use that for > staging/voting on the Maven artifacts. > > I'm happy to manage the release, unless anyone else wants to do it. > > Comments? > > +1 Antoine --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org For additional commands, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org From rachelpatel@example.org Sat May 15 05:31:17 2010 Return-Path: <rachelpatel@example.org> Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 60242 invoked from network); 15 May 2010 05:31:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 15 May 2010 05:31:16 -0000 Received: (qmail 47477 invoked by uid 500); 15 May 2010 05:31:16 -0000 Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 47148 invoked by uid 500); 15 May 2010 05:31:15 -0000 Mailing-List: contact rachelpatel@example.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Post: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Id: <dev.jakarta.apache.org> Reply-To: rachelpatel@example.org Delivered-To: mailing list rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 47140 invoked by uid 99); 15 May 2010 05:31:15 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 15 May 2010 05:31:15 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of rachelpatel@example.org designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-fx0-f44.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 15 May 2010 05:31:09 +0000 Received: by fxm16 with SMTP id 16so1885825fxm.31 for <rachelpatel@example.org>; Fri, 14 May 2010 22:30:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=j6qc1FGtCc2GeNfMkH/s6pOs16YBG1hRguI46tOoI2M=; b=i2acUwXvUkwH9r1jSHAffYhRuP7j+s00w2AZeOofNcVsGZespUgGSjl1x83FF8cWvi +FTJK69QZnswu6Cui9MYq8heRjIn5nuVaytBPOUde7xMS4D6HIHWnQlMfFaN6Jwl5l8t DqIl7xbHUxZkZSDR9Rg30e8vNPkIjlYE/jcOk= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=Qj+NIEHPQ26/ujaisKl9xUGNmdWPO71s1edijtMR61Pqv7RuylEyCe4P08PEOFFXke qo4OG5Wui4qArfzurhKhyRsua5fCdfFKau3y594pq23Pk9BMBwi4fbI793cfPgelucp1 9JpniCiPD/cTzDj0MsaatGTcipEUvp2ykXNx4= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id h21mr69537bkd.203.1273901448732; Fri, 14 May 2010 22:30:48 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Fri, 14 May 2010 22:30:48 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <rachelpatel@example.org> References: <rachelpatel@example.org> <rachelpatel@example.org> Date: Sat, 15 May 2010 07:30:48 +0200 Message-ID: <rachelpatel@example.org> Subject: Re: Release BSF 3.1 ? From: Petar Tahchiev <rachelpatel@example.org> To: rachelpatel@example.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org +1 2010/5/15 Antoine Levy-Lambert <rachelpatel@example.org>: > sebb wrote: >> There have been a few changes to the BSF 3.x code line since 3.0. >> >> I think it would be good to release version 3.1 along with its Maven version. >> >> I've asked for Nexus access for BSF 3.x, so I propose to use that for >> staging/voting on the Maven artifacts. >> >> I'm happy to manage the release, unless anyone else wants to do it. >> >> Comments? >> >> > +1 > > Antoine > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org > For additional commands, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org > > -- Regards, Petar! Karlovo, Bulgaria. - - - - - - - - | Author @ Manning Publications. | CEO @ Phamola | BGJUG-Bulgarian Java User Group Leader. | Apache Maven Developer. | Apache Jakarta PMC member. | Jakarta Cactus Lead Developer. | Codehaus Plexus Developer | Blogger: http://weblogs.java.net/blog/paranoiabla/ - - - - - - - - Public PGP Key at: https://keyserver1.pgp.com/vkd/DownloadKey.event?keyid=0x19658550C3110611 Key Fingerprint: A369 A7EE 61BC 93A3 CDFF 55A5 1965 8550 C311 0611 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org For additional commands, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org From rachelpatel@example.org Sat May 15 11:17:27 2010 Return-Path: <rachelpatel@example.org> Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 19464 invoked from network); 15 May 2010 11:17:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 15 May 2010 11:17:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 97506 invoked by uid 500); 15 May 2010 11:17:26 -0000 Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 97385 invoked by uid 500); 15 May 2010 11:17:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact rachelpatel@example.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Post: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Id: <dev.jakarta.apache.org> Reply-To: rachelpatel@example.org Delivered-To: mailing list rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 97377 invoked by uid 99); 15 May 2010 11:17:23 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 15 May 2010 11:17:23 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=10.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO strozzi.wu-wien.ac.at) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 15 May 2010 11:17:16 +0000 Received: from [83.161.120.155] (rony.wu-wien.ac.at [83.161.120.155]) (authenticated bits=0) by strozzi.wu-wien.ac.at (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3+etch1) with ESMTP id o4FBGpI0029956 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO) for <rachelpatel@example.org>; Sat, 15 May 2010 13:16:55 +0200 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=wu-wien.ac.at; s=sslmail2009; t=1273922215; bh=kMf5JArWGJ8u5XxCkeYj0Aq+dJOn5tZL9ub 6ICCuBQ8=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:MIME-Version:To:Subject: References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=o RVLrx7a7/oPShLjzCh/PZnCe0v8sC1V/ajGxb6SO4G4wn9Dj5jEGHKtjgBL+BTyFp6f joeKgh6Eelv5fX/QESt3mwOp32KZf0nYXXDFvDXt0ILQFeA0KMenvzPNyBg517J4Yf5 Z/G8j4lNHflrOJ8+O5kdNGuquFZ1n9c8YKmI= Message-ID: <rachelpatel@example.org> Date: Sat, 15 May 2010 13:16:34 +0200 From: "Rony G. Flatscher" <rachelpatel@example.org> User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:83.161.120.155) Gecko/20100227 Thunderbird/3.0.3 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: rachelpatel@example.org Subject: Re: Release BSF 3.1 ? References: <rachelpatel@example.org> In-Reply-To: <rachelpatel@example.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.0.1 OpenPGP: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-AntiVirus: checked by Avira MailGate (version: 3.1.2; AVE: 83.161.120.155; VDF: 83.161.120.155; host: pocken); id=2740-Oii155 X-Virus-Scanned: clamav-milter 0.95.1 at herpes X-Virus-Status: Clean X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org +1 ... and kudos for your great ongoing work, sebb! ---rony --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org For additional commands, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org From rachelpatel@example.org Mon May 17 15:33:43 2010 Return-Path: <rachelpatel@example.org> Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 96812 invoked from network); 17 May 2010 15:33:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 17 May 2010 15:33:41 -0000 Received: (qmail 33484 invoked by uid 500); 17 May 2010 15:33:38 -0000 Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 31665 invoked by uid 500); 17 May 2010 15:33:36 -0000 Mailing-List: contact rachelpatel@example.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Post: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Id: <dev.jakarta.apache.org> Reply-To: rachelpatel@example.org Delivered-To: mailing list rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 31508 invoked by uid 99); 17 May 2010 15:33:36 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 17 May 2010 15:33:36 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.4 required=10.0 tests=AWL,FREEMAIL_FROM,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of rachelpatel@example.org designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-fx0-f44.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 17 May 2010 15:33:29 +0000 Received: by fxm16 with SMTP id 16so3738078fxm.31 for <multiple recipients>; Mon, 17 May 2010 08:33:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=0YHLJ7Pkkespza1MW1w+HfnuJYDhpFdW9iCWegPFIEg=; b=tJPg57zOCRcb3TbO9LECgFJWiHVgfR2NtLpsd/biWWDdHRpYOLoVZ7iIUam9PoVSE5 eexSsjaXGVxw7uqvvaqxDL7nplF9dEKy9vonxgu2lpgRsSdNSstoIHSQ8DZpvSFYddxN bTPKF69CUEG205NW8Ijvx/Uk760LvijpKOo/M= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=no2KNEyAS98nC1Z/YFBVXv4rOthgHHkvgT5zcfWNIDR7O9ua7U/gyZmfhDK1HFEWH5 dvjerJ0DB2UtGIbEwXrZeIoACk2CkPKlx1BIRhfOVON0aO/GFCmrdAhWsnECAnEwMgeV iaLZMQy1xTk045GpqiIHpRE/4En+2H2la6Xt0= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id g1mr536548hbh.181.1274110387289; Mon, 17 May 2010 08:33:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Mon, 17 May 2010 08:33:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <rachelpatel@example.org> References: <rachelpatel@example.org> Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 16:33:07 +0100 Message-ID: <rachelpatel@example.org> Subject: [Travel Assistance] - applications Open for ApacheCon NA 2010 From: sebb <rachelpatel@example.org> To: JMeter Users List <rachelpatel@example.org>, rachelpatel@example.org, Commons Users List <rachelpatel@example.org>, Commons Developers List <rachelpatel@example.org>, HttpClient User Discussion <rachelpatel@example.org>, HttpComponents Project <rachelpatel@example.org>, Jakarta General List <rachelpatel@example.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 The Travel Assistance Committee is now taking in applications for those wanting to attend ApacheCon North America (NA) 2010, which is taking place between the 1st and 5th November in Atlanta. The Travel Assistance Committee is looking for people who would like to be able to attend ApacheCon, but who need some financial support in order to be able to get there. There are limited places available, and all applications will be scored on their individual merit. Financial assistance is available to cover travel to the event, either in part or in full, depending on circumstances. However, the support available for those attending only the barcamp is smaller than that for people attending the whole event. The Travel Assistance Committee aims to support all ApacheCons, and cross-project events, and so it may be prudent for those in Asia and the EU to wait for an event closer to them. More information can be found on the main Apache website at http://www.apache.org/travel/index.html - where you will also find a link to the online application and details for submitting. Applications for applying for travel assistance are now being accepted, and will close on the 7th July 2010. Good luck to all those that will apply. You are welcome to tweet, blog as appropriate. Regards, The Travel Assistance Committee. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org For additional commands, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org For additional commands, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org From rachelpatel@example.org Tue May 18 09:55:58 2010 Return-Path: <rachelpatel@example.org> Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 89581 invoked from network); 18 May 2010 09:55:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 18 May 2010 09:55:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 89461 invoked by uid 500); 18 May 2010 09:55:57 -0000 Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 88964 invoked by uid 500); 18 May 2010 09:55:54 -0000 Mailing-List: contact rachelpatel@example.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Post: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Id: <dev.jakarta.apache.org> Reply-To: rachelpatel@example.org Delivered-To: mailing list rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 88956 invoked by uid 99); 18 May 2010 09:55:54 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 18 May 2010 09:55:54 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.9 required=10.0 tests=AWL,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of rachelpatel@example.org designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO mail-pw0-f44.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 18 May 2010 09:55:47 +0000 Received: by pwi1 with SMTP id 1so3348051pwi.31 for <rachelpatel@example.org>; Tue, 18 May 2010 02:55:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=t06/xo3BVPueeZJtwhEHxDB4+JfSjgd2UcMbl5x13bg=; b=Lb64ngx+yY+v0ZWelCReFJCuavPEgYhIK7lJiZIffrhYaiyDOKbCWT2KAAK/6VkqNx jTrWuAbP0r4Wvq0C4mxkYe4tHyVPQ5+QJt5hhTuph9mSEcqHdtG6SKY+O8B8ZsWpAW4m 5BzvZJKKcxFHe8bY3DZhQT1p5NBbY207jxNW0= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=ICV9GLTVhzsl6KTjJdm4s5mibIeaS5QqKuL3TUj1eey88HPGzLkedzdvVBi+/0zx5L BjvfIK06Q/2O1dJ9/S3a0Zua/cQ5O1TkB3Dk2JR+J1pacjHntBFl/iOn85bDOULR2sRN qK063uQILOiPH4eBZkuX9YoMlxUVwkZpHsAK4= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id i21mr4807372wfa.132.1274176527296; Tue, 18 May 2010 02:55:27 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Tue, 18 May 2010 02:55:27 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <rachelpatel@example.org> References: <rachelpatel@example.org> Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 19:55:27 +1000 Message-ID: <rachelpatel@example.org> Subject: Re: Release BSF 3.1 ? From: Brett Randall <rachelpatel@example.org> To: rachelpatel@example.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 +1. My only hesitation is that work was done to try and get the Maven+Gump build passing, but we still have that issue with the odd dependency bsf-all:jar. I thought we were pretty close to fixing that - should I look into it again? If the Maven build is clean it should make deploying the artifacts to Maven Central easier. Brett On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 2:42 AM, sebb <rachelpatel@example.org> wrote: > There have been a few changes to the BSF 3.x code line since 3.0. > > I think it would be good to release version 3.1 along with its Maven version. > > I've asked for Nexus access for BSF 3.x, so I propose to use that for > staging/voting on the Maven artifacts. > > I'm happy to manage the release, unless anyone else wants to do it. > > Comments? > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org > For additional commands, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org For additional commands, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org From rachelpatel@example.org Tue May 18 15:18:58 2010 Return-Path: <rachelpatel@example.org> Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 9394 invoked from network); 18 May 2010 15:18:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 18 May 2010 15:18:57 -0000 Received: (qmail 58330 invoked by uid 500); 18 May 2010 15:18:57 -0000 Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 58192 invoked by uid 500); 18 May 2010 15:18:56 -0000 Mailing-List: contact rachelpatel@example.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Post: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Id: <dev.jakarta.apache.org> Reply-To: rachelpatel@example.org Delivered-To: mailing list rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 58184 invoked by uid 99); 18 May 2010 15:18:56 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 18 May 2010 15:18:56 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.3 required=10.0 tests=AWL,FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of rachelpatel@example.org designates 83.161.120.155 as permitted sender) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO fg-out-1718.google.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 18 May 2010 15:18:50 +0000 Received: by fg-out-1718.google.com with SMTP id 22so1599502fge.13 for <rachelpatel@example.org>; Tue, 18 May 2010 08:18:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=5ibNaMMfss/wTBaR5MMyEB4EmUMJ66tyFRXnk7e6dkA=; b=BAc4BVW7PZSkOYWGdFztoccYBiIUyJ4rXygeJ2VNXNy4KAJUZO6aaQUfaI0/o97U0F CZoOcb++4IaGNz0T+M/OvKeMiLvLqeViQTYLexjSIhZpPUpVnd7yWO7iZcdOxgoaA4f8 WeJUiuoGKx2Fxyk0YNEB3SJDxF31bHuon6b60= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=xODsSg/RzzCf95C68ITXpYFUJFotnJ1JtTb/IJzKSFZJxyXvbp7Gff+0l0g3AGz00d //m8veb2IfmbjEUk0HzLnxxEJKQA+q0z294KZLujQufF9cYarbjI/JguIsH1uVsPQyMn rCft7LPk23aikmy0GxNe11TxBsmgTEc3eYK94= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP id u11mr644158hbb.207.1274195908806; Tue, 18 May 2010 08:18:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 83.161.120.155 with HTTP; Tue, 18 May 2010 08:18:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <rachelpatel@example.org> References: <rachelpatel@example.org> <rachelpatel@example.org> Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 16:18:28 +0100 Message-ID: <rachelpatel@example.org> Subject: Re: Release BSF 3.1 ? From: sebb <rachelpatel@example.org> To: rachelpatel@example.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On 18/05/2010, Brett Randall <rachelpatel@example.org> wrote: > +1. > > My only hesitation is that work was done to try and get the Maven+Gump > build passing, but we still have that issue with the odd dependency > bsf-all:jar. I thought we were pretty close to fixing that - should I > look into it again? By all means - I could not work out why Gump does not find the dependency. It works fine on Hudson and on my WinXP box. I think any changes will be in the Gump descriptors which won't affect the release. But even if changes are needed to the BSF build files in order to support Gump, I don't think that's a release blocker, as the code builds and tests fine without Gump. > If the Maven build is clean it should make > deploying the artifacts to Maven Central easier. I think I have fixed the Maven Deploy. I am just tidying up some loose ends, and will call for a vote shortly. > > Brett > > > On Sat, May 15, 2010 at 2:42 AM, sebb <rachelpatel@example.org> wrote: > > There have been a few changes to the BSF 3.x code line since 3.0. > > > > I think it would be good to release version 3.1 along with its Maven version. > > > > I've asked for Nexus access for BSF 3.x, so I propose to use that for > > staging/voting on the Maven artifacts. > > > > I'm happy to manage the release, unless anyone else wants to do it. > > > > Comments? > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org > For additional commands, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org For additional commands, e-mail: rachelpatel@example.org From rachelpatel@example.org Tue May 18 16:04:31 2010 Return-Path: <rachelpatel@example.org> Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 27550 invoked from network); 18 May 2010 16:04:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by 83.161.120.155 with SMTP; 18 May 2010 16:04:30 -0000 Received: (qmail 58620 invoked by uid 500); 18 May 2010 16:04:29 -0000 Delivered-To: rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 58362 invoked by uid 500); 18 May 2010 16:04:29 -0000 Mailing-List: contact rachelpatel@example.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Post: <mailto:rachelpatel@example.org> List-Id: <dev.jakarta.apache.org> Reply-To: rachelpatel@example.org Delivered-To: mailing list rachelpatel@example.org Received: (qmail 58354 invoked by uid 99); 18 May 2010 16:04:29 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 18 May 2010 16:04:29 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [83.161.120.155] (HELO dtw-sttasbh02.sttasonline.com) (83.161.120.155) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 18 May 2010 16:04:22 +0000 Received: from dtw-sttasmail03.sttasonline.com ([83.161.120.155]) by dtw-sttasbh02.sttasonline.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC803.425.1622); Tue, 18 May 2010 12:03:59 -0400 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01CAF6A3.B9DF8C9C" Subject: Export Control Question re: BSF Date: Tue, 18 May 2010 12:03:57 -0400 Message-ID: <rachelpatel@example.org> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: Export Control Question re: BSF Thread-Index: Acr2o7h4S3rXqfl3RRuJZbc136WsVA== From: "Erin Clark" <rachelpatel@example.org> To: <rachelpatel@example.org> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 May 2010 16:03:59.0376 (UTC) FILETIME=[B9FA2100:01CAF6A3] X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org ------_=_NextPart_001_01CAF6A3.B9DF8C9C Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Hi All: =20 I'm not sure to contact, so forgive me, but I'm assisting a client with the export classification of their product and the subject product utilizes Apache Jakarta Bean Scripting Framework v.2.4.0. Do you know who might be the correct developer(s) for this open source code? If it's you all, do you happen to know what the Export Control Classification Number (ECCN) for this code? If you don't know the ECCN, can you please respond to the following questions at your convenience? =20 a. Does the code perform cryptographic functions (i.e., encryption/decryption)? b. Does the code contain any cryptographic algorithms (i.e., 3DES, Diffie-Helman, Blowfish, Rijndael, RC4, RSA) (whether or not these algorithms are actually being used by the software)? c. Is the code capable of interfacing with, calling to, using, invoking or enabling/disabling the cryptographic features within other software or within the underlying platform in any way? d. Is the code capable of performing message digesting/hashing (i.e., MD5, RIPEMD, SHA, Tiger), fixed data compression or authentication? e. Does the code contain/utilize and open cryptographic interface (OCI), where the cryptographic capabilities of the code are user-accessible and/or modifiable? (See below for a more detailed definition of OCI.) =20 =20 If 'yes' to any of the above, please provide detailed response. (Open cryptographic interface - A mechanism which is designed to allow a customer or other party to insert cryptographic functionality without the intervention, help or assistance of the manufacturer or its agents (i.e., manufacturer's signing of cryptographic code or proprietary interfaces). If the cryptographic interface implements a fixed set of cryptographic algorithms, key lengths or key exchange management systems, that cannot be changed, it will not be considered an "open" cryptographic interface. All general application programming interfaces (i.e., those that accept either a cryptographic or non-cryptographic interface, but do not themselves maintain any cryptographic functionality) will not be considered "open" cryptographic interfaces either.) Please let me know if you have any questions for me and many thanks in advance for your assistance. =20 Regards, Erin
{'source': 'Apache Software Foundation Public Mail Archives'}