forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Crossley <cross...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Unreleased Coccon Code in Forrest 0.8
Date Wed, 12 Dec 2007 08:23:58 GMT
Gav.... wrote:
> Sorry Ferdinand for my late input here,
> 
> From: Ferdinand Soethe
> > 
> > An Apache colleague looking at Forrest 0.8 just noticed that
> > we have used unreleased Cocoon Code in our release and told
> > me that this is not longer permitted.
> 
> Is this 'unreleased code' in a public SVN, in trunk or a branch etc ?

Yes, all ASF code is in SVN.

I will try to provide the background in a
separate email.

> Is the code covered by i/CLAs, in other words was the code written and
> committed and covered by an iCLA. If yes then surely any Apache project is
> covered here.

Yes, as with any ASF code, it is covered by Contributor License
Agreements (CLAs).

> It matters not that it was released or not by Cocoon, that
> only proves that Cocoon PMC endorse it as part of their release. What
> matters is that it is open source code under the Apache 2.0 license and
> that when we released it as part of our official release then the Forrest
> PMC endorsed it.

I reckon that there are more issues. Lets see the outcome
of other discussions.

> Another example, if someone wanted to take some of Forrests code, either
> released or from trunk, as long as they adhere to the Apache 2.0 license,
> surely they can do so?
> 
> I'd like to see where it says 'this is no longer permitted' before I change
> my mind :)

Many ASF principles are not written down anywhere.
We often operate on the basic principles, and commonsense
answers flow from there.

I gather that it is not a matter of "no longer"
but rather that it never was.

> > Do we need top change our release procedures to avoid that
> > in the future?
> 
> No, I don't think we do, sure we can tighten up and make sure we are using
> code under the license correctly, but I see no reason why we can not take
> unreleased code and incorporate it.

The topic is now being discussed on another mailing list.
Some of us will need to try to participate and summarise.

> One last thought came to mind though (which may contradict some of what I
> say above, we'll see) , if Cocoon are not endorsing code that we are using,
> then mentioning the name 'Cocoon' in that code or in the package name may
> imply that Cocoon too endorse that code, we may therefore need to remove any
> Cocoon references and repackage it as a Forrest lib etc or whatever. That
> may end up being harder than it sounds.

Very hard, if not impossible.

-David

Mime
View raw message