incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: apache binary distributions
Date Wed, 19 Aug 2015 05:20:15 GMT
On Tue, Aug 18, 2015 at 10:15 PM, Marvin Humphrey <marvin@rectangular.com>
wrote:

> However, if "Steve&Nick" are Apache project contributors publishing
> unreleased
> code and making an end run around Apache release policy, there's greater
> cause
> for concern.
>

On the other hand, if Steve&Nick are contributors publishing unreleased
code with VERY LARGE WARNINGS that it is their NON-APACHE APPROVED RELEASE,
then the use of the trademark is probably just fine.  Indeed, the PMC may
view it as a service for, say, testing purposes.

The problem comes from the level of confusion.  If the Debian package were
not a repackaging of a real release from Apache, I would find it very
misleading and confusing. As it is, I prefer it because of the packaging
convenience and the knowledge that Debian does a nice job of moving the
released Apache bits to me in an understandable and manageable way.

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message