Mailing-List: contact dev-help@community.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@community.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy)
From: "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov>
To: "dev@community.apache.org" <dev@community.apache.org>
Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2011 10:07:55 -0800
Subject: Apache Extras Question
Thread-Topic: Apache Extras Question
Thread-Index: AczGVG5BCvWZxtafRkWIMykAlj7djA==
Message-ID: <9FBF6112-CBD1-454E-873B-F79C1648ECA6@jpl.nasa.gov>
Accept-Language: en-US
Content-Language: en-US
acceptlanguage: en-US
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0

(moving this thread over from community@apache.org, per Bertrand's suggesti=
on)

Hey Guys,

I was reading [1] and I noticed item 3.1 and 3.2 stating that projects at E=
xtras shouldn't
use the org.apache namespace (e.g., if Java), and they shouldn't use the ap=
ache project
name in their extras name. I find this kind of odd.=20

Here's my concrete situation. Over in Apache OODT ville, I've got 2 plugins=
 for our PushPull
system that pulls down remote file content from sites and downloads them. T=
he 2 plugins
are Java plugins that integrate libraries that are LGPL licensed. I can't i=
nclude these plugins
in Apache OODT as part of PushPull even though we use the plugins extensive=
ly on=20
projects where we deploy OODT and they are better FTP plugins than existing=
 friendly (to ALv2)
licensed projects. So, given the choice of simply keeping the code housed i=
n our internal
JPL SVN and being unable to more broadly share it, I decided to throw up a =
project on=20
Extras called oodt-pushpull-plugins, and throw the code up there. I however=
 did this before=20
reading [1] and am now worried I'm in violation of 3.1 and 3.2 because I us=
ed org.apache.oodt.cas.pushpull
as the namespace for my java package and I used oodt all over my code (whic=
h I licensed
under ALv2 FWIW, here [2]). FWIW also, the only folks I would expect to wor=
k on=20
[2] would be OODT PMC members, myself so far, and Brian Foster who are folk=
s
who work on PushPull.

So I'm wondering what's up with 3.1 and 3.2. Isn't the use of similar proje=
ct names precisely=20
what we want at Extras? And what's the harm in allowing projects to use org=
.apache.oodt=20
in their namespace over there? That won't confuse people IMHO, because I'm =
not to=20
publish to Maven Central (and wouldn't want to -- I'd want folks to downloa=
d this library
independently and mvn install it locally, and instructed folks to do so on =
[3]) and because
we will make it clear with documentation on our Wiki (that I was just about=
 to write but
will hold off on until I hear the result of this thread) that the code at o=
odt-pushpull-plugins
on Apache Extras is *not* Apache OODT.=20

Comments back would be appreciated. Ross told me that ComDev is charged wit=
h
Apache Extras so that's why I'm asking here.

Cheers,
Chris

[1] http://community.apache.org/apache-extras/guidelines.html
[2] http://code.google.com/a/apache-extras.org/p/oodt-pushpull-plugins/
[3] http://s.apache.org/8FB


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
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
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org