incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Upayavira ...@odoko.co.uk>
Subject Re: Podling Release Requirement (WAS: Re: [VOTE] Graduate Felix to TLP status)
Date Mon, 18 Sep 2006 10:26:17 GMT
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On 9/13/06, Upayavira <uv@odoko.co.uk> wrote:
>> So how does Felix proceed now? Accept that the rules have just changed
>> on it, after spending some months under the view that a release _wasn't_
>> necessary to graduation, and go back and do something it would have done
>> months ago had it not been told to do otherwise?
> 
> The issue, as I see it, is that the Incubator PMC is being asked to
> certify that the Felix PPMC is able to manage itself as a top-level
> project.  A critical activity of a PMC is to conduct a release.
> Another point with conducting a release while in the Incubator is that
> it generally flags any legal issues as people check it.  So when a
> PPMC decides not to conduct a release and asks to graduate immediately
> as a TLP, we needs to be doubly sure that the due diligence has been
> completed.  Hence, it's fair to expect probing questions - especially
> when the last status report indicated that a release was forthcoming.
> 
> First off, Felix doesn't seem to have a NOTICE or LICENSE files in its
> trunk (hint: it's in the wrong directory and in the wrong format), nor
> does Felix have the appropriate license blocks (hint: see
> http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html).
> 
> Based on a quick superficial glance, I also see files in the tree that
> aren't ours, such as:
> 
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/felix/trunk/http.jetty/src/main/java/org/osgi/service/http/HttpContext.java
> 
> Yes, it's licensed under the ALv2, but AFAICT, there is no documented
> provenance for these files: it bears a CVS tag and refers to the OSGi
> Alliance as the copyright owner.  We should be citing that in the
> LICENSE and NOTICE files.  Instead, all I see in FELIX-9
> (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-9) is a discussion that
> some code should be donated - no reference is made in the file or
> commit message or JIRA as to where it came from.  It sounds like there
> might be an IP clearance form on file somewhere if this code was
> donated - then those copyright blocks can go away in favor of our
> standard one.  If we don't have clearance, then we have to make sure
> that we do not ever remove that license block in those files.  But, if
> we make any changes to those files, then our license block needs to be
> added as well.
> 
> It also seems that Felix has forked Tomcat's servlet code - which is okay:
> 
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/felix/trunk/javax.servlet/src/main/java/javax/servlet/GenericServlet.java
> 
> However, the copyright years have been altered from the original file
> - removing 2004 and adding 2005 - which isn't okay:
> 
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/tomcat/servletapi/branches/servlet2.3-jsp1.2-tc4.x/src/share/javax/servlet/GenericServlet.java
> 
> 
> (Ideally, Felix should resync with Tomcat once they update their
> license block to remove the copyright years; but Tomcat may not be
> updating Servlet 2.3.  I'm unsure if an ASF project can relicense
> forked code from another project - I'll ask on legal-discuss@...)
> 
> These instances cause my antennae to be raised to there being more
> issues throughout the Felix codebase.  I don't believe these are
> serious issues at all, but these are issues that must be cleaned up
> before graduation should be considered.  (I don't have the time to do
> a more thorough review: that's the job of the Felix PPMC.)

Thank you for your comments. This now is clearly enough feedback to show
that we've got more work to do.

I will recall the vote until we have done a release in order to clear up
the sort, and have shown that release to the incubator PMC.

> Finally, as Noel pointed out, we have not seen a proposed Felix PMC
> roster or who the PMC chair will be.  The Board requires that before
> even placing such an item on its agenda.

That part is easy, and I agree that not mentioning the proposed PMC
chair was an omission. We've already discussed (and voted on) the issue,
and plan to follow the Jackrabbit model - I would be the initial PMC
chair. I will then be grooming Richard Hall to take over the role, as he
is clearly the best suited individual for the job - just needs more
experience of working within an ASF environment (don't we all, but
that's another question :-) )

Regards, Upayavira


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


Mime
View raw message