couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gianugo Rabellino <>
Subject Re: CouchDBX
Date Mon, 25 Aug 2008 17:28:19 GMT

On Aug 25, 2008, at 6:10 PM, Jan Lehnardt wrote:

> On Aug 23, 2008, at 17:48, Damien Katz wrote:
>> I'm not sure it should be an Apache project, because we can't  
>> distribute the binaries as Apache (which is what most people want)
> I'm not sure if there is an issue here. We certainly can't release  
> something under anything other than the original license, but I  
> don't see how that would be a problem since all licenses involved  
> (as far as I can tell) are BSD-ish in nature.
>> and most people who are capable of building it would just use the  
>> current build and install tools anyway.
>> On a related note, from the download page we should to link to a  
>> page of externally built binaries (with disclaimers that they  
>> aren't official Apache releases) so people can find them easily.
> Is that okay by ASF standards? Mentors?

I don't see any harm, as long as it's clear that it's not an ASF  
project. To be honest, however, I don't see anything wrong with  
bringing the code in officially either. Any externally compiled code  
will be a dependency, and a lot of ASF projects are distributing  
external dependencies in binary format together with the source code  
(just think of the countless jars in the ASF repo). Am I missing  
something else?

Pls note I didn't do any homework in finding our whether the ICU  
license is kosher. A cursory read doesn't seem to imply any major  
issue, though.

Gianugo Rabellino
Sourcesense - making sense of Open Source:
Blogging at

View raw message