incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From C├ędric Champeau <cedric.champ...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Drop incubating requirement of Maven artifacts
Date Fri, 06 Jan 2017 17:24:23 GMT
@wade it would be better to continue the discussion in the discuss vote,
rather than this vote which has been cancelled.

See
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/15550f5bf622ae3070b558505c8a0fd0ce3b23df3012d57de8b6d9f3@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E

2017-01-06 17:32 GMT+01:00 Wade Chandler <wadechandler@apache.org>:

> On Jan 4, 2017 4:46 AM, "Jochen Theodorou" <blackdrag@gmx.org> wrote:
>
> On 04.01.2017 07:28, Mark Struberg wrote:
> [...]
>
> I'm a bit surprised that groovy still uses the org.codehaus groupId, but I
> > guess they have a deal with Ben (the former owner and thus (former?)
> > copyright holder of 'Codehaus').
> > So while this will work for now I guess that even groovy will move to
> > org.apache.groovy in the long term (maybe with a new major version).
> >
>
> A new major version is a big thing for Groovy, but yes. In our view it is
> the only realistic way, since people can expect breaking changes between
> major versions and that includes in our view package names as well as group
> ids.
>
>
> It's not a big deal YET, but http://codehaus.org is not reachable anymore.
> > And if anyone buys this domain he will have a much better position
> > regarding trademarks than we do.
> > What if someone buys the codehaus.org domain and publishes own artifacts
> > under org.codehaus.groovy? Can we even prevent someone else to e.g
> publish
> > org.codehaus.groovyng artifacts?
> >
>
> Assume we change and 2 months later somebody does that? How is the
> situation then any better?
>
> Actually I wonder if Ben would donate the domain to the ASF...
>
>
> This would be a huge deal for NetBeans too. Too many projects based off of
> it. The domain is being donated to Apache though AFAIK, but still, end
> users shouldn't have to change so many sources or break other dependencies,
> which may not be using the new package names, just because the package
> names are org.netbeans and someone thinks they should be
> org.apache.netbeans unless there is a true legal reason, and that would be
> rare, but a different email thread I imagine, but way more complicated than
> just changing the package name in the case of Groovy or NetBeans because we
> are talking about whole ecosystems and dependency graphs.
>
> Thanks
>
> Wade
>

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