incubator-bluesky-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bill Stoddard <wgstodd...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Blluesky PMC report
Date Wed, 08 Apr 2009 14:25:31 GMT
Samul Kevin wrote:
> 2009/4/8 Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacretaz@apache.org>
>
>   
>> Hi,
>>
>> On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Samul Kevin <lovesummerf@gmail.com> wrote:
>>     
>>> http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/April2009#preview...
>>>       
>> It would be good, IMHO, to include some info about the community side
>> of things...a recent thread [1] seems to indicate that most of the
>> BlueSky committers are not working on the project anymore.
>>
>>     
>   And the people who are now contributing to the project are not listed as
> commiters.  It does not matter. Though acting slowly, people are working. I
> am now more  seriously concerned about the progress. I thought the speeding
> of podling would be fastened , however, it is still like turtle
> crawling....in 1 and 3/4 month since the beginning of this semester. Yes,
> things get a little better now. But i don't think it is good enough. We have
> reasons, as having classes or working on several projects simultaneously,
> nevertheless, i don't think we can treat them as excuses to fend off not
> doing THIS PROJECT good.
>
>   

A critical milestone will be getting the code grant in place and 
checking the code into svn.  When the code is checked into svn, we can 
look for contributors from outside the XJTU students and begin building 
a sustainable community (I think we have some people in India interested 
in the project).    We simply have to begin releasing code from the ASF 
if the project is ever to take the next step to sustainability.  Samul, 
I will work with you this week to do the next round of code review; 

Here is the software grant that XJTU needs to submit for code developed 
by XJTU: http://www.apache.org/licenses/software-grant.txt
Please review and begin preparing it.

Now... I have a very difficult question to ask...
Bluesky project relies heavily on video technology, most of which is not 
suitable for redistribution by the ASF (due to licensing terms and 
condition).   The team has made a great effort over the past year to 
scrub the project clean of incompatibly licensed code, but is it 
enough?  My concern is that the project will never be able to resolve 
the difficulties around the licensing of the video technologies... and 
that maybe the ASF is not the best home for Bluesky for this reason. 

My question... can we really succeed in realizing the goals of the 
bluesky project under the license and legal constraints imposed by the 
ASF? Is it really possible?

Bill

Mime
View raw message