commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sandy McArthur <>
Subject Re: Pool: comments requested for a new implementation
Date Tue, 15 Nov 2005 00:34:13 GMT
On 11/14/05, robert burrell donkin <> wrote:
> i had intended to sit down and analyse the code in detail. however, i
> have given it a quick once over and it looks very interesting. i'm happy
> with the general direction of the code. i work best when i can create
> patches for small issues as i go. this is difficult when the code isn't
> in a code repository, so i think it's best to try to get the paperwork
> started as quickly as possible (since it may take a while to get
> everything sorted out).

I'm working with the trunk checkout of pool and made the tarball such
that if you just extract it in the src/ dir it will expand next to the
existing sources and you can use the existing ant build file like you
normally would.

See the package overview page for a decent description of how the
composite object pool works:

> i'm sure you're aware of all these issues but it's important to the ASF
> that our code base is clean legally. so, before we can accept such any
> substantial contribution we need some legal paperwork from you.

Fully understood.

> unfortunately, the ASF is still growing the process (through the
> incubator project) so i need to find out (and then document) what's
> required (in specific terms). this may take me a few days.

What is missing from this?:

> in general terms, the code base needs to be clean and original with a
> known provenance. we also need you to either fax or post some signed
> legal documents to the ASF. are either of these requirements likely to
> be an issue?

Nope. I signed and mailed in an Individual Contributor License
Agreement as described on: and
put it in the mail on November 9th.

Sandy McArthur

"He who dares not offend cannot be honest."
- Thomas Paine

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message