incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Leo Simons <m...@leosimons.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Incubator PMC to approve 3.0-M1 release of ServiceMix
Date Wed, 26 Apr 2006 13:25:18 GMT
On Fri, Apr 21, 2006 at 09:40:34AM -0600, Bruce Snyder wrote:
> On 4/21/06, Rodent of Unusual Size <Ken.Coar@golux.com> wrote:
> > Leo Simons wrote:
> > > *sigh*. I feel like a broken record these days.
> > >
> > > Nowhere does any policy ever say "you can do stuff which is not permitted by
> > > law or for which you have no license". To state the reverse in a policy would
> > > be rather, well, redundant. There is ample documentation out there on our
> > > websites (and more in the works) to help with complying with the law and various
> > > licenses.
> >
> > No, but the legal aspect isn't necessarily the concept
> > looming largest in a developer's mind.  So a simple checkbox
> > on the page (I'll do it myself in a few minutes, if I figure
> > out how to frob the site) to the effect of: 'Have the
> > licences of any/all bundled code been identified and noted
> > in the release?  Has a NOTICE file been included that
> > summarises them and their requirements where they differ
> > from the Apache licence's?  Have their requirements been
> > met?' would, IMHO, be a goodness.
> 
> Bingo! Ken hit the nail on the head!!! A checklist would do wonders
> for podlings and preparing releases.

Okidoki. But checklists are scary, since they could provide a false sense of
security and have a tendency not to be updated or kept (keeping the status files
for podlings up-to-date seems very hard).

Note it should not be for podlings, it should be for all of the ASF. Cliff
has been working on lots of this kind of stuff

> Having been around the ASF since the Geronimo incubation began (August
> 2003), it was never clear to me why these policies were in place and

That is bad, really bad. The "why" is rather important. Sorry about that.

Please, please do help with improving docs so this kind of stuff is more
clear -- it ain't exactly easy to write down properly *and* clearly.

> Furthermore, looking at other projects that have recently graduated is
> most definitely *not* a good way to find proper release examples as
> some don't even have a LICENSE file, let alone a NOTICE or even the
> word Incubator or Incubating in the release name.

Hrmpf.

> Developers always
> look for code examples to follow and incubation is no different.
> Pointing out a couple or three projects that have graduated, have met
> 100% of the requirements and actually are a good representation would
> help immensely. Being able to poke around a project that has been
> qualified by the Incubator PMC as having met all requirements would
> short circuit a lot of the frustrations.

SpamAssassin. HTTPD. APR.

Standards are changing and solidifying -- the whole java world has quite a
bit of legal trickyness to deal with that is different from the rest of the
world. Watching harmony in this regard makes sense -- its pretty much a
superset of all the "mess".

> Let's try to work together to remedy this situation in the interest of
> all parties involved and make it easier for future podlings.

+1

LSD

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message