incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamil...@acm.org>
Subject RE: Questions for the cheap seats. - Priming the Pump
Date Mon, 06 Jun 2011 14:32:32 GMT
OK, I get that.  I am pushing for the least that could possibly work in terms of having a base
under ALv2 that can then be refined, refactored, whatever, but it captures the contribution
in a form that is suitable to continue from, however much it still needs to be wacked on.
 It might not build, or only build with stubs, because there are toxic dependencies to be
staunched off until they are dealt with.  I think one wants to minimize how long it is sat
on in a non-ALv2 form is all, even if it isn't "release-worthy."  

I can stop yammering about that now.

In that sense, you're right, it is not the here-it-is-and-its-not-ours case were the incubator
proposal to be declined.  In the case of OpenOffice.org, even a code dump under ALv2 is a
significant artifact.

 - Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: Greg Stein [mailto:gstein@gmail.com] 
Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2011 23:19
To: general@incubator.apache.org; dennis.hamilton@acm.org
Subject: Re: Questions for the cheap seats. - Priming the Pump

Well, a quick answer is that we can't make a release that requires code under a license less
permissive than ALv2. "Releasing" a tarball of the entry code would most likely not fulfill
that requirement.
That's why it gets a bit tricky.

The meta-answer is that we don't want to surprise downstream consumers with a release that
requires more than ALv2.

I don't disagree with the concept, mind you, but I'd rather push forward with making the podling
accepted and successful. Then making a proper release that consumers can rely on, with the
full backing of the ASF.

Cheers,
-g

On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 00:40, Dennis E. Hamilton <dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote:
> Since I don't know what "proper, vetted release" entails, I will have to shut up.  If
it is a concern that Oracle has included something that doesn't belong to them, I suppose
you might want to do whatever you need to do to ensure the IP is in order.
>
> But considering that this is the (initial) extent of the grant, I think having it archived
for what it is would simply make sense (I am not talking about it being a release).  I also
think it is a good idea just in case we mess up moving it into the Apache infrastructure and
need a do-over.
>
> It is not about leaving the incubator or anything.  I think of it as baked prudence with
a sauce of transparency.  I'm surprised this is a problem, but then I are a simple man ...
.
>
>  - Dennis
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Greg Stein [mailto:gstein@gmail.com]
> Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2011 21:22
> To: general@incubator.apache.org; dennis.hamilton@acm.org
> Subject: Re: Questions for the cheap seats. - Priming the Pump
>
> Sorry, but we don't typically release code from not-passed proposals or failed podlings.
This would be an extraordinary circumstance, which is why I mentioned the Board input.
>
> So... I would not recommend this as a "first step" since it would be abnormal. Tarballs
on the sly aren't good; the ASF wants a proper, vetted release.
>
> Cheers,
> -g
>
> On Mon, Jun 6, 2011 at 00:00, Dennis E. Hamilton <dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote:
>> I think this should be the very first step regardless, even for first materials accessible
from the podling.
>>
>> The next would be to figure out how to stage it onto the Apache infrastructure, build
what can be built, see what the deltas are, etc.
>>
>> This sort of preservation and assessment seems indispensible in getting going and
seeing what the opportunities are.
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Greg Stein [mailto:gstein@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2011 20:45
>> To: general@incubator.apache.org
>> Subject: Re: Questions for the cheap seats.
>>
>> [ ... ]
>>
>> Not speaking for the Board, but this is what I'd lobby for: that we package up all
the code that was granted to us, apply the ALv2, and drop the tarball onto archive.apache.org.
>>
>> Third parties could pick up that code under the ALv2 license, but it would never
be a "released product from Apache". Other producers of OOo-related software could incorporate
that code, should they wish.
>>
>> [ ... ]
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>


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


Mime
View raw message