incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Upayavira ...@odoko.co.uk>
Subject RE: [VOTE] Release Apache Pivot 1.1 (second try)
Date Sat, 18 Apr 2009 00:36:23 GMT
On Sat, 2009-04-18 at 10:18 +1000, Gavin wrote:
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Upayavira [mailto:uv@odoko.co.uk]
> > Sent: Saturday, 18 April 2009 9:23 AM
> > To: general@incubator.apache.org
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Pivot 1.1 (second try)
> > 
> > On Fri, 2009-04-17 at 10:48 +0800, Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> > > On Thu, Apr 16, 2009 at 11:07 PM, sebb <sebbaz@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > As far as I know, putting a file in a publicly accessible SVN
> > > > repository is considered as distribution too.
> > >
> > > No, I am very positive that this is not the case. Legal dilligence is
> > > done on the release artifacts separately from SVN issues. Unlike
> > > release artifacts, SVN are at times incomplete, incorrect and
> > > inaccurate. "Tags" have no legal meaning whatsoever, and should not
> > > even be part of the discussion.
> > >
> > > So, since we are looking at a "Release", please spare the SVN
> > > discussion for later.
> > 
> > Personally, I give a lot of weight to what Larry said on legal-discuss.
> > 
> > Both SVN and releases are distribution. So, we _must_ be sure that
> > anything that goes into SVN we have the right to distribute.
> 
> Are you talking about trunk, or release tags/branches ?
> 
> SVN in my opinion is a place where we place code to work on collaboratively
> , it's a developer resource - anything in there is subject to being broken
> code-wise, documentation-wise and for short bursts may contain 3rd party
> jars and items without appropriate licensing. Acceptable I think, until some
> volunteer dev cleans it up.
> 
> I do not agree that anything in svn is distribution, the same as snapshots
> and nightlies are not (supposed to be) advertised to joe bloggs the user,
> but jane bloggs the dev being on the dev list will know where to get her
> hands on it.
> 
> And now I just read the bit about sparing svn discussion for later, oops.

There is a distinction between 'distribution' and 'release'.

As Larry pointed out, someone from company X (say, IBM) may do a
checkout from our SVN. That means a transfer of intellectual property
from ASF to IBM. That is distribution - no question about it.

Thus, I cannot commit a bootlegged music track into Apache SVN, as
neither I, nor the ASF, have the right to distribute it. However, I
could commit an LGPL library, as we do have the right to distribute
that. We just have a policy to not allow it to be included within a
'release' - the release being the end-product of ASF effort, and the
thing that is intended for consumption by the public.

Upayavira



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


Mime
View raw message