incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Markus Geiß <markus.ge...@live.de>
Subject RE: [DISCUSSION] How to deal with runtime dependencies
Date Thu, 11 Feb 2016 06:14:18 GMT
Thanks for the feedback.

The branch develop reflects the code we are talking about, and can
be found here:

https://github.com/apache/incubator-fineract/tree/develop

Best,

Markus

.::YAGNI likes a DRY KISS::.

> Date: Wed, 10 Feb 2016 19:07:28 -0800
> Subject: Re: FW: [DISCUSSION] How to deal with runtime dependencies
> From: jacques@apache.org
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> 
> I've used this as reference previously:
> 
> http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#prohibited
> 
> Specifically this sentence:
> 
> "...For example, using a GPL'ed tool during the build is OK."
> 
> That would suggest that using GPL tools for build and test should be okay.
> 
> I'll let others address the distribution of optional components question in
> great detail. My sense is this is primarily focused on how "optional" the
> undistributable component is.
> 
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 12:56 AM, Markus Geiß <markus.geiss@live.de> wrote:
> 
> > Hey all,
> >
> > We've started a thread at our dev list and forgot to send it to the
> > general incubator list too.
> > Any opinion is appreciated, you can find the original message below.
> >
> > Best,
> >
> > Markus
> >
> > .::YAGNI likes a DRY KISS::.
> >
> > > From: markus.geiss@live.de
> > > To: dev@fineract.incubator.apache.org
> > > Subject: [DISCUSSION] How to deal with runtime dependencies
> > > Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 14:12:04 +0100
> > >
> > > Hey all,
> > >
> > > hope this finds you well.
> > >
> > > I thought instead of discussing this on top of pull request, because it
> > is more
> > > than just the JDBC driver, it is the right time to create a new thread.
> > >
> > > We are currently using MySQL's Connector/J and Hibernate's EntityManager
> > at
> > > runtime as the JDBC driver and JPA implementation. Our source code is not
> > > depending on both.
> > >
> > > It would create a huge effort to replace both for test and production
> > environments.
> > >
> > > The questions is:
> > >
> > > Would it be compliant with the license policies if we omit them for our
> > source
> > > release, but keeping them for our own integration tests.
> > >
> > > If somebody is creating a deployable distribution, the expectation is
> > that whomever
> > > is creating the distribution can decide what he wants to use.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > >
> > > Markus
> > >
> > > .::YAGNI likes a DRY KISS::.
> >
 		 	   		  
Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message