incubator-bluesky-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From bill stoddard <>
Subject Re: Multiple concerns reviewing BlueSky podling website
Date Mon, 11 Aug 2008 15:33:04 GMT
I think we all understand that the bluesky team is working to get the 
code ready to be contributed to the ASF under the AL 2.0.  Bertrand's 
concern is very specific and easy to fix... 

His concern (and mine) is this... the bluesky webpage here ,   is potentially misleading.  
Someone landing on this page could easily believe that the code being 
pointed to is 'approved' by the ASF and is part of the ASF BlueSky 
project.   The web page needs to be updated to clearly show a) the 
license of the code being referenced and b) clearly state that the code 
is NOT part of the official ASF bluesky project.

If I have time this afternoon, I may try to make some updates myself to 
provide guidance.  If I do make updates, the bluesky team will certainly 
need to clean them up :-)


chen hecky wrote:
> Dear all,
>        At first, I want to say that we can't upload the code to Apache now
> because that the code is non-ASF. We now have to change the code which
> includes GPL(
>  you
> will see the problem of our code from  there, there are some lib of GPL
> inluding in our code.). So we can't submit the code to Apache. We are
> changing it to ASF, and we need help from you, community and Apache.
> However, somebody want to see our code, so we have to setup a website(It's
> not a Apache's) for downloading the code. The code are not ASF.
> We are now trying our best to change the code from non-ASF to ASF, but we
> are short of experience. I think the community is a place of communicating
> and studing with others, so I hope get help from the community.
> 2008/8/9, Bertrand Delacretaz <>:
>> On Thu, Jul 31, 2008 at 10:18 PM, Luciano Resende <>
>> wrote:
>>> While reviewing the BlueSky podling website, I noticed the following
>> issues :
>>> - The BlueSky podling website have a download page, that is pointing
>>> to non-apache bluesky released artifacts. I think this is at least
>>> very confusing, as it can allude users to think this is a endorsed ASF
>>> release. Is this OK ?....
>> As others have indicated, the download links at
>> point directly to non-ASF servers
>> hosting, in some cases, GPL-licensed code (XPlayer), without any
>> mention that said "releases" were made outside of the ASF.
>> This is totally unacceptable.
>> What would be ok, IMHO, is for the bluesky pages to point
>> to a download page on another server, which lists the downloads and
>> their licenses, and is clearly labelled as non-ASF.
>> Bluesky mentors, is this being fixed?
>> vaguely hints at
>> "correcting things as quickly as possible", but it's been nine days
>> since Luciano's message, and the download links are still up at
>> -Bertrand

View raw message