couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jan Lehnardt <...@prima.de>
Subject Re: More 0.8 Release TODO
Date Tue, 27 May 2008 16:39:31 GMT

On May 26, 2008, at 01:16, Christopher Lenz wrote:

> Hey all,
>
> we should be preparing for a 0.8 release.
>
> On the development side, there's still group reduce missing (and  
> maybe more polish or at the very least some docs on reduce in  
> general). Also, I'd like to get the RESTful attachment API  
> enhancements in, and there's also the runtimeconfig branch waiting  
> to be completed and merged back.

I try to work more on the runtimeconfig
branch this week. Remaining issues are:
- writing back changes to the ini file
- notify modules of changes
- turn more hardcoded options into runtime-configurable ones.

Reply here or on the "Runtime Configuration #1" thread
if you'd like to help out and need information.


Do we have an assignee for the attachment API? :-)


> Anyway, this mail is about the less exciting things that I think we  
> need to get done before we can push for a release through Apache:
>
> 1. Licensing problem: Javascript Shell
>
> CouchDB includes a JS shell that is derived from <http://www.squarefree.com/shell/

> >. Initially it was pretty much a verbatim copy, but it has been  
> changed to integrate nicely into our Futon web interface. The JS  
> Shell is, according to the above web page, "GPL/LGPL/MPL tri- 
> licensed". However, there's no actual license or copyright statement  
> to be found anywhere.
>
> None of those three licenses are without problems for an Apache  
> project. See <http://people.apache.org/~rubys/3party.html>. GPL and  
> LGPL "must not apply to any software within an Apache product", and  
> the MPL requires "requires that the distribution of modifications or  
> derivative works be made available under the same license as the  
> original work".
>
> In addition for the MPL, "Code that is more substantial, more  
> volatile, or not directly consumed at runtime in source form may  
> only be distributed in binary form." As the JS shell is just an HTML  
> and a Javascript file, there's no way we could distribute it in  
> binary form, so AFAICT it will need to be nuked completely.
>
> Maybe someone with more knowledge of these legal issues can chime in  
> here.

Apart from Damien, no one stood up for the JS shell. Would
it be possible to remove it from the main distribution and provide
it as a drop-in add-on from one of our non-ASF sites until licensing
issues are resolved? Just in case this blocks an 0.8 release.

Cheers
Jan
--

Mime
View raw message