httpd-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Paul Richards <p.richa...@elsevier.co.uk>
Subject Re: Apache legal question
Date Tue, 07 May 1996 16:22:13 GMT
In reply to Chuck Murcko who said
> 
> all in Paris right now. However,  I'd say this discussion, which started
> out talking about version labelling semantics, should suffice to show
> that Cygnus is on the level, and reasonable in its aims and its treatment
> of others' works. That should be visible even for folks with no prior
> knowledge of what you all do.

There's a few issues here. 

1) The name, it's up to Cygnus really what they call their product. We
couldn't stop them using the name Apache even if we wanted to so
they don't need our permission. The intention of the license is
that you can do whatever you want as long as recognition is given to
the project (the exact requirements are in the license). I say, "intention"
since I'm dubious as to it's legality and in any case we've no means or
desire to take formal action if it was ever necessary. We simply hope that
most people will respect the projects wishes and most do.

Since Cygnus want to call their product Apache in any case then this is
a non-issue. Feel free to recommend to Cygnus what you'd like them to
do but at the end of the day it's their choice, as long as it's clearly
distinguishable from the Apache release tag then I'm not bothered.

2) Divergence of the products. Well, again that's simply up to
Cygnus. Knowing their reputation for free software support I'm sure
they'll be very co-operative in providing bug fixes and enhancements.
What avenue they choose to do so will be something for them to
decide. At the end of the day they are selling a Cygnus product and
their main priority will be to provide a good service to their
customers. That may not be entirely compatible with the development
environment that we have here.

I don't see a problem with someone from Cygnus having access to
cvs to put bug fixes directly into our tree and give them
better access to enhancements we make. I don't think it will really
be practical to expect Cyngus to keep their product completely in
sync (or vice-versa) because the development environment while likely
diverge quite a lot from the supported product that Cygnus maintains
and in any case, they may well want to deal with bugs in a different
manner to us.

The bottom line I guess is this, Cygnus can do what they're going to
do without contacting us or working closely with us. The fact that 
they are keen to forge links should be seen as a good thing and
rather than trying to get them caught up in our manner of working
(as we are over this naming wrangle) we should just gratefully
accept anything they are able to put back into the project.

If Cygnus are interested, we could branch the tree and have an Apache
branch and a Cygnus branch and they could update their branch as and
when they wish with their own development sources at Cygnus and we can
then merge any of the bits we want into our branch and they could
do the same.

-- 
  Paul Richards. Originative Solutions Ltd.  (Netcraft Ltd. contractor)
  Elsevier Science TIS online journal project.
  Email: p.richards@elsevier.co.uk
  Phone: 0370 462071 (Mobile), +44 (0)1865 843155

Mime
View raw message