incubator-esme-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Richard Hirsch <hirsch.d...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Clowns running the show, isn't that nice?
Date Mon, 11 Jan 2010 04:46:51 GMT
Why don't we wait and see what suggestions surface on the
legal-discuss list before we continue this debate on the esme mailing
lists? Without their legal advice, it is impossible to achieve clarity
or an agreement on our options.

I also agree that is critical to deal with this issue - however, a
flamewar here and on Twitter isn't going to help anyone.

D.

On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 11:19 PM, Gianugo Rabellino
<g.rabellino@sourcesense.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 10, 2010 at 9:42 PM, Vassil Dichev <vdichev@apache.org> wrote:
>> This time, though, I think a certain mentor's reply was more
>> inflammatory and the options suggested were disappointing.
>
> OK - I'll try and start by being more accommodating: can you please
> enlighten me on the other possible options? To me either we (the ASF)
> have been licensed copyright on the ESME codebase, or we are not. In
> the former, there is an ESME project. In the latter, there is nothing,
> nada, zilch. As a mentor, I cannot possibly let statement such as
> David's go unanswered - it needs to be crystal clear how things work.
> And I would actually urge you to have a look at the point where I
> jumped into the discussion, to be amazed at how accommodating and
> willing to talk David was.
>
>> ESME could
>> go on without David. But David's initial code contribution and design
>> is in the heart of ESME so much so that it's inseparable. Removing
>> David's contribution would mean starting from scratch.
>
> You are getting it wrong. There is no such thing as "David's
> contribution" in Apache project terms, the moment David decides that
> he didn't license his copyright to the ASF. It's code that landed here
> by mistake, full stop.
>
>> So I was
>> surprised that a mentor would suggest that splitting ESME right before
>> the release is a better course of action than an educated discussion.
>
> I'm all for discussing, but I stand by my words: *if* David's code is
> not licensed to the ASF as per the CLA and general Apache procedures
> demand, then there is nothing the ASF can release. And may I point out
> that it wasn't me (yet) resigning from the project?
>
>> I'd also say that my message is no more sneaky than Gianugo's email to
>> the private list. My Twitter timeline is public and I know Bertrand is
>> following me. By contrast, at the time of Gianugo's reply I wasn't on
>> the private list.
>
> Oh, give me a break now. I wrote to the private list as this is about
> a potentially sensitive legal and personal issue - as such, the
> private list was a good candidate for discussion although I concede
> that it works here as well. But calling my message sneaky because you
> didn't do your freakin' homework as a committer by subscribing to all
> the project lists is laughable.
>
>> I do not believe the ESME team needs special handholding to improve
>> and evolve the project.
>
> Allow me to disagree. After a year, I am faced with core committers
> who didn't bother read what they signed and understand the basis of
> how the apache legal side works. Or even arguing that a major legal
> issue is shouldn't get in the way of a release. That means a lot of
> need for handholding. It actually means going back to ASF-101.
>
>> I think we have proven this during the course
>> of the last year. There are regular commits and discussions, this
>> means our motivation is strong enough. But I believe there are other
>> things to try first before suggesting blocking the release and
>> removing the project founder's code.
>
> Again, I'm all ears and I would love to hear alternatives. But please
> consider I am not the one calling names and going away taking the ball
> with me. All I'm saying is that if this issue isn't resolved for the
> better, some code will have to go. And it would be completely
> irresponsible to the verge of being insane to ever start considering
> for a single moment that a release is even remotely possible given the
> current state of affairs. You are building on sand.
>
> --
> Gianugo Rabellino
> M: +44 779 5364 932 / +39 389 44 26 846
> Sourcesense - making sense of Open Source: http://www.sourcesense.com
>

Mime
View raw message