community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christian Grobmeier <grobme...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Apache Extras Question
Date Thu, 29 Dec 2011 20:49:50 GMT
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
<chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
> Hey Christian,
>
> On Dec 29, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 9:23 PM, Mark Struberg <struberg@yahoo.de> 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.
>>>
>>> Would it be possible to have it under the package org.apacheextras ?
>>> If we don't even allow that, then we can just close down apacheextras.org - because
then there is no use for it imo.
>>
>> +1
>>
>> Leads me to the question... if I fork an asf project on github and do
>> some work on it, am I required to change the org.apache namespace?
>> If no, third parties can release code with the apache namespace (and
>> they actually do) and then I ask myself why Chris should not be able
>> to use the namespace.
>
> Bingo! That's exactly what I was saying too, Christian. In my case, my "fork"
> existed even before the ASF Apache OODT "source" existed before we
> made a source code donation and brought the code to Apache via a Software
> Grant. The "fork" code still lives in the internal JPL repository but I would like
> to share it with others, but I couldn't bring it through into the ASF Apache OODT
> project (via JIRA + Software Grant + Patch/etc.) b/c I wouldn't want to do that
> to our users, meaning, I wouldn't want to stick them with even a runtime/downstream
> dependency on an LGPL project. So I've gone to great trouble to refactor the code,
> make it its own project, and then make it a Plugin to CAS PushPull (it builds to a jar
> that users can simply drop in to their PushPull deployment's ./lib directory).
>
> So, in this fashion, if users want to get these Push Pull plugins (if the default
> implementations of the FTP protocol that we ship don't work for their FTP sites),
> they can simply (I thought) go to Apache Extras, svn export the code, build the
> plugin, and then drop the jar in their existing deployment.
>
> If users can't do that due to some effort by ComDev to "police" things that IMHO
> aren't violations at all, then we aren't serving the ASF very well with Apache Extras
> and it should be decommissioned.
>
> To avoid that nuclear option, I proposed 2 concrete suggestions and even volunteered
> to work up a patch that implements the one with less sweeping change. IOW, I
> offered to put my money where my mouth was and do the work to update the docs.
>
> Sound good?

For me yes, but I am just a lurker on this list. But are you sure this
issue is apache-extras related? It boils down to: are other people
allowed to use the org.apache namespace or not. Maybe this is
trademark related? If others are not allowed, then many projects must
rename their spaces. if others are allowed, then there can not be such
a policy as "do not use org.a namespace" for apache-extras.

Probably you should include Shane too?

Cheers

>
> Cheers,
> Chris
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> 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
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>



-- 
http://www.grobmeier.de
https://www.timeandbill.de

Mime
View raw message