incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "robert burrell donkin" <robertburrelldon...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [Vote] Incubating Project Policy
Date Mon, 05 Feb 2007 13:19:39 GMT
On 2/4/07, William A. Rowe, Jr. <wrowe@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> robert burrell donkin wrote:
> >>
> >> Please give me a case where back channel commits are permitted under
> >> the proposed commit policy?
> >
> > the wording does not make clear the intention of the rule
> >
> > for example, i post: "feature X is totally fantastic and i've attached
> > some code that nearly implements it"  the consensus is: "that's
> > totally cool: commit it right away". so i do.
> >
> > but the community never knew that the code wasn't mine to commit
>
> You committed fraud.  I propose (in the private@ pmc list) to turn off
> your commit access if/when this is discovered.

it isn't fraud unless i misrepresent the attribution

in above example, i simply neglected to mention the origin of the
code. maybe i made an honest mistake: unless it's made clear that
every contribution which is not an original contribution by the
contributor requires attribution then these will happen.

> This policy isn't ment to cover every base; no policy should.  Sure we
> can add a section on fraud/ethics, but that's a different matter.

the new policy addresses the concern neither directly or effectively

without insisting on attribution, it's a waste of time

<snip>

> >> No need in some cases.  At httpd and apr, for example, they bundle the
> >> pcre, expat etc.  It was handled correctly, licenses were checked.  But
> >> the choice to bump expat to 1.95.8 or 2.0.0 is a community decision.
> >
> > need to check the wording of the board resolution: it's possible that
> > this should have been a community decision but cleared through the
> > incubator
>
> Those predate the incubator.  Call it grandfathered.  They didn't become
> ASF projects, either - they are external bundled dependencies.
>
> In the future you would be correct.  Pre-announcing the desire to pull in,
> say, libxslt would trigger someone on the list to say 'slow down, we need
> to run that through Incubator for IP clearance' if things work as they
> should.

community approval of an external dependency is different from legal
clearance for a particular artifact. whenever the artifact is updated,
it probably needs to be cleared for IP.

- robert

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


Mime
View raw message