community-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Roya Abdi <>
Subject Re: What is the legal basis for enforcing release policies at ASF?
Date Fri, 21 Aug 2015 13:59:39 GMT
در تاریخ ۲۱ اوت ۲۰۱۵ ۱۸:۲۴، "Shawn Heisey" <>

> On 8/20/2015 8:03 PM, Benson Margulies wrote:
> > If a distro takes a release of Apache X, and make significant changes to
> > it, and then distributes it, I believe that it's not OK with us for them
> to
> > simply call it Apache X. I've seen some evidence that Gentoo Linux makes
> a
> > regular habit of this, because their policies drive them to make some
> > pretty scary changes in some cases. Others may not share my view.
> This is how Debian ended up with "iceweasel" instead of "firefox."
> Mozilla was not OK with allowing its trademarks to be used for the
> version of those products that Debian was including.  Mozilla went
> 800-pound gorilla on Debian.  Debian complied, but took the rebranding
> route rather than allow Mozilla to force them to compromise on their
> internal guidelines.  They got a small measure of revenge with the
> package names they chose. :)
> Here's a similar situation applicable to Apache ... the Debian and
> Ubuntu projects include a very old version of Apache Solr.  The code
> gets patched quite a bit, and a few of the changes could probably be
> called intrusive, but it doesn't fundamentally change what the user
> gets.  When the packages are installed (they split the Solr/Lucene code
> into *many* binary packages), the file locations are *dramatically*
> altered compared to a binary or source download from the Solr website.
> Given what those projects do to our code and packaging, do we have any
> right to tell them they can't call their package "Solr"?  If we do have
> that right, are we losing anything by not exercising it?
> Their changes do mean that when people come to the solr-user mailing
> list looking for help, we sometimes have to refer them to the downstream
> maintainers, because we can't make any sense of where things are.  Even
> though it sometimes creates support issues, I personally don't think
> there's any big problem with the way that Debian/Ubuntu changes our
> software, but what would a lawyer say?
> Thanks,
> Shawn

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