Mailing-List: contact derby-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Derby Development" <derby-dev@db.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy)
Date: Wed, 14 Sep 2005 10:43:33 -0700
From: Rick Hillegas <Richard.Hillegas@Sun.COM>
Subject: Re: JUnit license, was: subversion etiquette]
In-reply-to: <432858CF.9020202@bristowhill.com>
To: Derby Development <derby-dev@db.apache.org>
Message-id: <43286145.8070104@sun.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.6 (Windows/20050716)
References: <432854F3.9040303@sun.com> <432858CF.9020202@bristowhill.com>

Thanks Jean, David, and Francois for your suggestion that I amend 
BUILDING.txt. Now I'm back to an etiquette question: I'm hoping to check 
in a JUnit assertion-based test. Since the test needs JUnit to build, my 
patch will break everyone's build: they will have to download the junit 
jar themselves. This could annoy a lot of folks. What is the etiquette 
for breaking the build this way?

Thanks,
-Rick

Jean T. Anderson wrote:

> Rick Hillegas wrote:
>
>> Oh bother, said Pooh.. We'd like to write assertion-based tests. What 
>> do folks think we should do:
>>
>> o Ask JUnit to license itself under the Apache license.
>>
>> o Use some other assertion-based test framework. Any suggestions?
>>
>
> You can use Junit with no problem at all -- and other Apache projects 
> do. You just can't check it into subversion.
>
> The DITA toolkit needed additional handling because we need to check 
> some of the files into subversion; we found that just downloading it 
> wasn't sufficient for what we needed.
>
> -jean
>
>> -Rick
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> Subject:
>> Re: subversion etiquette
>> From:
>> "Jean T. Anderson" <jta@bristowhill.com>
>> Date:
>> Wed, 14 Sep 2005 09:31:48 -0700
>> To:
>> Derby Development <derby-dev@db.apache.org>
>>
>> To:
>> Derby Development <derby-dev@db.apache.org>
>>
>>
>> Daniel John Debrunner wrote:
>>
>>> Rick Hillegas wrote:
>>>
>>>> Sometime soon I hope to checkin some JUnit-based tests for testing the
>>>> compatibility of our clients and servers. As part of this 
>>>> submission, I
>>>> want to checkin the JUnit jar itself (into tools/java alongside the
>>>> other jars). Is it ok for the svn diff to contain a big binary file 
>>>> like
>>>> this? Will this annoy/confuse reviewers? Is there a more polite way to
>>>> submit jar files?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm not sure you can check Junit's jar into Apache's subversion
>>> repository due to its licence (CPL 0.5).
>>>
>>> http://junit.sourceforge.net/doc/faq/faq.htm#overview_7
>>
>>
>>
>> Dan is correct; we cannot check CPL-licensed software/files into Apache.
>>
>> For example, we couldn't check DITA Open Toolkit files into the derby 
>> svn repository because it is under CPL. We discussed the issue with 
>> the DITA OT developers and they additionally released it under the 
>> ASL 2 at the end of August.
>>
>> Discussions about various licenses pop up on this list:
>>  http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/ .
>>
>> -jean
>>
>