aurora-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jake Farrell <jfarr...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Forking twitter-commons into our tree
Date Fri, 03 Jul 2015 03:10:13 GMT
yes, makes it easier to donate when its Apache License 2.0, but still
requires the IP clearance [1], which is handled through the IPMC. This is
required so there is an audit trail of that software being donated to the
ASF

-Jake

[1]: http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html



On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 10:41 PM, Bill Farner <wfarner@apache.org> wrote:

> Jake - i'm not fully versed on licenses, but is that true even though it's
> all Apache License 2.0?
>
> -=Bill
>
> On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 5:28 PM, Jake Farrell <jfarrell@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > no objections, but we would have to get an IP clearance doc from Twitter
> > for this code in order to bring this code into the ASF
> >
> > -Jake
> >
> > On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 3:20 PM, Zameer Manji <zmanji@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Hey,
> > >
> > > Aurora depends heavily on twitter-commons for lots of functionality.
> > > However upstream is not very active and I suspect that it will be less
> > > active in the future. Currently we depend on artifacts published from
> > this
> > > project which causes us to depend on older versions of guava and guice.
> > >
> > > As a result, it seems that will be difficult to address tickets like
> > > AURORA-1380 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/AURORA-1380>
> without
> > > changing something. I propose we fork all of the java portions of
> > > twitter-commons into our tree, remove the parts we don't use and update
> > > guava and guice so we can move forward on this front.
> > >
> > > What are people's thoughts on this?
> > >
> > > --
> > > Zameer Manji
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message