felix-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Karl Pauls" <karlpa...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Remote Shell
Date Sun, 24 Aug 2008 22:21:49 GMT
On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 10:11 PM, Richard S. Hall <heavy@ungoverned.org> wrote:
> Felix Meschberger wrote:
>> Hi,
>> Richard S. Hall schrieb:
>>> Felix Meschberger wrote:
>>>> Hi,
>>>> Richard S. Hall schrieb:
>>>>> Regarding the NOTICE file, I don't think we want the "originally
>>>>> developed" stuff in there. That was the whole point of the IP clearance,
>>>>> that this can be claimed to be Apache software. To acknowledge Deiter,
>>>>> should use one of the other approaches that I mentioned in my other email
>>>>> message.
>>>> In other projects we also have this "originally developed" signature in
>>>> the NOTICE files for code we imported into the respective project. Of course
>>>> the official part is done by the IP clearance, but I think we should still
>>>> state that the original code came from the outside.
>>> I disagree here, because it potentially gives reason for concern about
>>> who actually "owns" the code. Since Dieter contributed the code to Apache,
>>> it is now Apache code so it should be listed as such. The NOTICE file, in my
>>> view, is not the place to try to give credit to contributors since there are
>>> lot of potential contributors to all code contained in a release. We have
>>> certainly not done this in any other NOTICE file. Perhaps we can get some
>>> more opinions.
>> I disagree, too ;-)
>> The NOTICE file is exactly the place to record such code origins. We do
>> this for various reasons currently, e.g. when we include OSGi API packages
>> or KXml2 classes.

But the point is that this code is developed external. This is
different because it is our (i.e., Apache) code.

>> To also record the original authorship of the code is just another such
>> reference case. But I see your point about confusion (I don't think it is a
>> big issue, though). So what do you think of the following extension:
>>    Contains code originally developed and contributed to the
>>    Apache Felix project by Dieter Wimberger
> Well, I would still not be in favor of this, since it is does not follow
> past precedent in Felix. We specifically started a contributor page for this
> very reason.

I agree, the above statement would set a bad precedent and make us
end-up with a lot of this kind extensions that are not really needed.
The contributor page seems to be the place to note this kind of things
to me.



> -> richard

Karl Pauls

View raw message