incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pedro Giffuni <...@apache.org>
Subject Report Builder extension (was Re: [proposal] development for the first AOO release)
Date Wed, 02 Nov 2011 14:18:06 GMT
Hi Oliver;

What do you mean by "removal of the 3rd party components"?

I think the report builder should be moved to Apache-extras
with three suggestions:

- Attempt to contact the authors of the pentaho stuff,
maybe they would like to have a say in it's future or
even relicense it.
-Wait until the headers are changed to AL2, before moving
it out.
- Rob has a SVN dump: maybe we can use it to preserve most
of the early history of the stuff we move to Apache-extras.

cheers,

Pedro.

--- On Wed, 11/2/11, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann <orwittmann@googlemail.com> wrote:
...
> 
> I will start working on the removal of all 3rd party
> components which 
> are needed for the report builder extension.
> 
> Best regards, Oliver.
> 
> 
> On 24.10.2011 15:18, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I would like to propose the following development
> milestones on our way
> > to the first AOO release:
> >
> > - "IP cleared" milestone
> > For this milestone we should remove all 3rd party
> components which are
> > not compliant to Apache's "Third-Party Licensing
> Policy" [1]. All
> > license headers in the source code files should be
> updated according to
> > Oracle's SGA. Additionally, we may update certain
> information in the
> > product in order to reflect that the product is now
> coming from Apache
> > (e.g. the splash screen, the about dialog, ...).
> > Then the IP review required by Apache could be
> performed in order to
> > meet the corresponding requirements for our first
> release.
> > This milestone would result in an OpenOffice.org
> missing a lot of
> > important features, but this milestone would be the
> basis regarding
> > Apache's IP rules. This milestone could be released
> according to the
> > Apache rules.
> >
> > - "features back" milestone
> > For this milestone we should work on bringing back the
> features which
> > are lost in the previous milestone. I do not think
> that we have to bring
> > back every feature for a first release. Thus, we would
> have got the
> > possibility to work on the features which are of most
> interest. At some
> > point we could create a "release candidate" and start
> working on
> > stabilizing it for a first release, if we think that
> the "must have"
> > features are back.
> >
> >
> > In order to coordinate efforts and to avoid duplicate
> work I propose to
> > use the IP clearance wiki page [2].
> > The basis for its content is more or less the Apache
> Migration wiki page
> > [3]. Some additional information has been collected on
> certain 3rd party
> > components. Also priorities have been assigned. But
> its content is not
> > "nailed in stone". It currently reflects more or less
> the input and
> > opionions of the editing contributors to these IP
> clearance issues.
> > Thus, it would be a living document to reflect our
> knowlegde about these
> > IP clearance issues. It would also document our
> efforts and our
> > decisions regarding these efforts.
> >
> >
> > Any remarks/comments/improvements/adjustments?
> > Any objections to follow such plan for our first
> release?
> >
> >
> > Best regards, Oliver.
> >
> > P.S.: I will be out-of-office for the rest of the
> week. Thus, I will
> > probably not reply to your input regarding my proposal
> this week -
> > please excuse.
> >
> > References:
> > [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html
> > [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/IP_Clearance
> > [3] http://ooo-wiki.apache.org/wiki/ApacheMigration
> 

Mime
View raw message