incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Craig L Russell <Craig.Russ...@Sun.COM>
Subject Re: clarification on SF license and sandboxes
Date Mon, 06 Nov 2006 23:21:34 GMT
On Nov 6, 2006, at 1:10 PM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:

> On 11/6/06, Henri Yandell <flamefew@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 11/6/06, Mike Kienenberger <mkienenb@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > On 11/6/06, Henri Yandell <flamefew@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > I'm still confused - why do we allow people to upload  
>> attachments that
>> > > are not intended for inclusion?
>> > >
>> > > I can see one very reasonable reason from a user point of view  
>> - the
>> > > example they want to upload is business related and so they  
>> want to do
>> > > their best to explain the problem to us, but not to have us  
>> publish
>> > > those details any further. However that reason doesn't hold up  
>> as it's
>> > > public if it's in our JIRA and if we don't know the license on  
>> it,
>> > > then can we even use it to resolve the issue?
>> > >
>> > > What makes an attachment special? Why don't we have to do this  
>> for
>> > > comments and the jira issue itself?
>> > >
>> > > Not seeing why we don't just say:  "All issues + attachments are
>> > > intended for inclusion".
>> >
>> > There's a difference between "I don't want to contribute this  
>> code to
>> > the project code base" versus "I don't want my code published."
>> >
>> > The "no" option means the code is not for inclusion into the  
>> project.
>> > It doesn't necessarily mean that the code is confidential.
>>
>> What does 'not for inclusion' mean though?
>>
>> If it's marked that way, can I take bits of the code out of it? Do I
>> have to worry about looking at that code and then implementing
>> something in the apache code that does the same thing and getting
>> sued?
>>
>> For example, what if someone posts a bit of Sun's Java source to the
>> Harmony JIRA and marks it 'not for inclusion'. There's a world of
>> meaning in that not for inclusion flag. What's in it for the ASF to
>> have a not for inclusion option?
>>
>> I'm not seeing why we allow it - better to say "Anything here is for
>> inclusion".
>
> As you mentioned before, it's typically used to post example code
> demonstrating a bug.    As a project committer, what's in it for me is
> that I can use the submitted code to identify and fix the bug.   The
> code doesn't have to be apache licensed for me to do that (ASF
> licensing isn't viral).   There's still benefit to the project simply
> in identifying and fixing bugs even without a code grant to the ASF.
>
+1

I believe that there you have captured the reason for this statement  
in the JIRA "attach file" screen:

<jira>
Contributions intended for inclusion in ASF products (eg. patches,  
code) must be licensed to ASF under the terms of the Apache Software  
License. Other attachments (eg. log dumps, test cases) need not be.
</jira>

A test case with real domain classes might be needed to demonstrate a  
problem, but that should not require the bug submitter to contribute  
the domain classes to Apache.

Craig


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

Craig Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!


Mime
View raw message