community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de>
Subject Re: Apache Extras Question
Date Thu, 29 Dec 2011 20:50:07 GMT
> they include runtime dependencies (via Maven2) on LGPL code. 


Sorry, I think I just misunderstood your scenario.

If it's just runtime linked to a LGPL project then all is fine and you can have your stuff
ALv2.


But there are other projects around which will need to use GPL I fear :/



> Super +1000. That's what I'm rapidly realizing. Why the heck did we 
> associate ourselves with Apache Extras if it's just Google Code?

Basically I like the apacheextras idea, but it _must_ be made clear that apacheextras has
it's own rules which are _not_ ASF business.
The current http://apacheextras.org is really bad in this regard, because it's just a redirect
to google.code showing a plain page with a few projects listed on it.

LieGrue,
strub



----- Original Message -----
> From: "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov>
> To: "dev@community.apache.org" <dev@community.apache.org>; Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de>
> Cc: 
> Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 9:36 PM
> Subject: Re: Apache Extras Question
> 
> Hi Mark,
> 
> On Dec 29, 2011, at 12:23 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
> 
>>>  If you are saying this is compatible with ALv2 ? Then why use Apache
>>>  Extras instead of just the oodt SVN official repo in Apache ?
>> 
>>  But that's exactly the point! It is NOT ALv2 because it seems that 
> Chris' project compiles against GPL sources and thus also must be GPL 
> licensed.
> 
> Yeah I wasn't sure of that. I would say my 4 Java files are ALv2 licensed, 
> but that
> they include runtime dependencies (via Maven2) on LGPL code. I'm not a 
> license expert, but
> I thought that would be OK. I know you have a TON of open source legal knowledge
> and have respected your opinion on it for a while so you tell me.
> 
>> 
>>  Would it be possible to have it under the package org.apacheextras ?
> 
> Yeah I thought about that too. I'd be ~ok with that compromise but still
> question what we are doing if our own PMCs can't start up a project on 
> Apache Extras and use org.apache.* as a namespace.
> 
>>  If we don't even allow that, then we can just close down 
> apacheextras.org - because then there is no use for it imo.
> 
> Super +1000. That's what I'm rapidly realizing. Why the heck did we 
> associate
> ourselves with Apache Extras if it's just Google Code?
> 
> I'd go further and say if my 2 concrete proposals are shut down I'll 
> likely 
> just take the oodt-pushpull-plugins project down, throw it up on Github or 
> something 
> under my personal account, change the namespaces to something nice and 
> snarky like org.apacheextrassucks.anotherapacheprojecttogit.* *grin*
> 
>> 
>>  Of course this all implies that apacheextras will make a prominent 
> mentioning that apacheextras != ASF and apacheextras might not only contain ALv2 
> licensed sources but also others.
> 
> Yeah, precisely. Thanks for getting what I was saying Mark!
> 
> Cheers,
> Chris
> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>  ----- Original Message -----
>>>  From: Luciano Resende <luckbr1975@gmail.com>
>>>  To: dev@community.apache.org
>>>  Cc: 
>>>  Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 9:13 PM
>>>  Subject: Re: Apache Extras Question
>>> 
>>>  On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
>>>  <chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>>>>  (removing community@ from the CC list; aren't we trying to kill 
> that 
>>>  thread?)
>>>> 
>>>>  Hi Ross,
>>>> 
>>>>  Thanks for replying. Comments below:
>>>> 
>>>>  On Dec 29, 2011, at 11:04 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>>>  [...snip...]
>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>  It's my understanding that anyone can start up a 
> project at 
>>>  Apache Extras,
>>>>>>  in which case, if that person doesn't have an availid 
> here at 
>>>  the ASF, and
>>>>>>  doesn't have an ICLA on file, then that's another 
>>>  situation that I won't
>>>>>>  speculate on. What I'm much more interested in is in 
> the 
>>>  situation I presented
>>>>>>  within this thread. I have an availid. I am an ASF member. 
> I was 
>>>  looking
>>>>>>  at Apache Extras as a place to share some Apache OODT 
> plugins that
>>>>>>  leverage code that is LGPL licensed, that I couldn't 
> otherwise 
>>>  share within
>>>>>>  the normal Apache OODT SVN home. Prior to me coming to 
> Apache 
>>>  Extras,
>>>>>>  this has been code housed in an internal JPL SVN repository 
> for 
>>>  years, even
>>>>>>  before we brought the software to Apache. I'd like to 
> use 
>>>  Apache Extras to
>>>>>>  facilitate sharing with an even broader community and to 
> share the 
>>>  plugins
>>>>>>  we've developed (which themselves are ALv2 licensed) 
> with 
>>>  others.
>>>>> 
>>>>>  The ASF does not release code under any license other than the 
> Apache 
>>>  license,
>>>> 
>>>>  Who asked to release the code? I just want an SVN to throw the code 
> up at.
>>>>  If you look at oodt-pushpull-plugins [1], the LICENSE.txt file is 
> ALv2. The 
>>>  code
>>>>  we wrote (in Java) is ALv2. The code includes a runtime Maven2 
> dependency
>>>>  on libraries that provide FTP protocol implementations (Ftp4Che [2] 
> and 
>>>  JvFtp [3])
>>>>  that are LGPL licensed.
>>>> 
>>> 
>>>  If you are saying this is compatible with ALv2 ? Then why use Apache
>>>  Extras instead of just the oodt SVN official repo in Apache ?
>>> 
>>>  -- 
>>>  Luciano Resende
>>>  http://people.apache.org/~lresende
>>>  http://twitter.com/lresende1975
>>>  http://lresende.blogspot.com/
>>> 
> 
> 
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Chris Mattmann, Ph.D.
> Senior Computer Scientist
> NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA
> Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246
> Email: chris.a.mattmann@nasa.gov
> WWW:  http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department
> University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 

Mime
View raw message