forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ross Gardler <>
Subject Re: input.wordpress (was Re: potential new plugin)
Date Wed, 01 Oct 2008 20:31:32 GMT
David Crossley wrote:
> David Crossley wrote:
>> Ross Gardler wrote:
>>> David Crossley wrote:
>>>> Ross Gardler wrote:
>>>>> Brian M Dube wrote:
>>>>>> David Crossley wrote:
>>>>>>> The dependencies on the main facilities (e.g. WordPress and MySql)
>>>>>>> seem okay to me. I expect that they would be treated as
>>>>>>> system requirements, i.e. there is no use for the plugin if
>>>>>>> there is no server available to connect to and extract content
>>>>>> (Snip)
>>>>>>> Some of them (e.g. ehcache) are already in forrest core lib
>>>>>>> but need to to updated.
>>>>>>> If Forrest followed our usual technique of re-distributing
>>>>>>> the supporting jars as a convenience, then definitely there
>>>>>>> are some in that list that cannot be re-distributed:
>>>>>>> e.g. hibernate - See 150 hits for that word on legal-discuss@
>>>>>>> especially LEGAL-7 (and its linked issues) and the responses
>>>>>>> to that and to LEGAL-9.
>>>>>>> e.g. mysql-connector-java - I expect that there would be
>>>>>>> similar issues. Is there no suitably licensed alternative?
>>>>>> I haven't found one. I don't have the energy to make the plugin work
>>>>>> without Hibernate and the MySQL driver. I'm happy to make the code
>>>>>> available elsewhere, but this is a blocker to host it here. Note
>>>>>> have not contacted legal-discuss. The time and energy for that is
>>>>>> lacking, too.
>>>>> If there is no way of getting into Forrest ...
>>>> We don't know that yet. Brian is not the only person
>>>> in this community. It is a pity that no-one can make
>>>> the effort to follow up on such legal aspects.
>>> Peronslly I don't need to follow up. There is GPL code - that's the end 
>>> of the story for the ASF. I too have looked for alternatives in the past 
>>> - they don't (to my knowedge exist) and I've wasted much time on this in 
>>> the past.
>>> I'm offering a solution. If others want to follow up on the legal front 
>>> fine - for me it is a dead end so lets get the code where it can be used.
>> I am not referring to finding a replacement. I mean that
>> our "legal-discuss" list is not a boogey monster. They
>> want to treat everything on a case-by-case basis.
>> No-one has yet even approached them on this matter.
>> See Henri's answer in
> The way that i see it is that is it up to our PMC.
> It is an optional plugin. If it was the core of
> Forrest then things would be very different.
> Sure we cannot distribute those jars, but we can choose
> to say to the user: You need to download xxx.jar and
> add it to your lib directory.
> If that approach is acceptable to this PMC then
> so be it.
> Someone needs to clarify that with legal-discuss.

As a PMC member I will support whatever those putting the effort into it 
want to do. What I care most about is getting the code out there uner 
clear legal terms. I respect the ASF hard line on licence compatailbity 
as it results in considerable cost saving for thos doing procurement 
(i.e. we can trust the ASF).

I don't like the idea of shipping code that does not work the way 
everything else does (i.e. add the plugin to and then 
download these jars). It breaks the way Forrest is supposed to learn.

By distributing from a place where we explicitly have a more relaxed 
attitude to the GPL compatability argument and by highlighting this to 
users we allow people to decide on the risk for themselves (if they do 
not intend to redistribute there is no risk in any case).

I said I'm prepared to support whatever those doing the work want to do 
- I set up an SF account for this purpose and I will do what is 
necessary to allow this code to reach that distribution point if that is 
what those doing the work want.

I don't think it is helpful to push in one direction or another and ask 
for others to do the work to move in that direction.


View raw message