Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D38A4B5E1 for ; Fri, 6 Jan 2012 18:23:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 72619 invoked by uid 500); 6 Jan 2012 18:23:44 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 72318 invoked by uid 500); 6 Jan 2012 18:23:43 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 72303 invoked by uid 99); 6 Jan 2012 18:23:43 -0000 Received: from minotaur.apache.org (HELO minotaur.apache.org) (140.211.11.9) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 06 Jan 2012 18:23:43 +0000 Received: from localhost (HELO mail-vx0-f175.google.com) (127.0.0.1) (smtp-auth username robweir, mechanism plain) by minotaur.apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 06 Jan 2012 18:23:43 +0000 Received: by vcbf1 with SMTP id f1so1451717vcb.6 for ; Fri, 06 Jan 2012 10:23:41 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.224.135 with SMTP id io7mr4257992vcb.72.1325874221727; Fri, 06 Jan 2012 10:23:41 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.220.5.195 with HTTP; Fri, 6 Jan 2012 10:23:41 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: <4F040B3F.7040104@googlemail.com> <4F06BFB5.5080200@apache.org> Date: Fri, 6 Jan 2012 13:23:41 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Extensions hosting From: Rob Weir To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 1:17 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: > > On Jan 6, 2012, at 9:56 AM, Rob Weir wrote: > >> On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 12:39 PM, Ross Gardler >> wrote: >>> On 6 January 2012 16:31, Rob Weir wrote: >>>> On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 11:20 AM, Ross Gardler >>>> wrote: >>>>> On 6 January 2012 15:49, Rob Weir wrote: >>>>>> On Fri, Jan 6, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Ross Gardler >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> On 6 January 2012 15:03, Rob Weir wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ... >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> I'm not saying you *will* be allowed to host them, I'm saying you >>>>>>>>> *may* be allowed to. Similarly, I'm asking you, and others, to st= op >>>>>>>>> saying you *won't* be able to host them. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ... >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>> Lets continue to focus on what the AOO *wants* not what some of us >>>>>>> perceive is *allowed*. Once we know what is wanted we can explore w= hat >>>>>>> is possible. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> OK. =C2=A0So if we want to host the extensions site, as is, and have= it >>>>>> conform to some revised ASF policy, then we would need to be able to >>>>>> do things like: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1) Host GPL extensions on Apache servers, using websites associated >>>>>> with Apache products, using Apache trademarks. =C2=A0In other words, >>>>>> without the distance the Board has encouraged the use of Apache-Extr= as >>>>>> for in the past. >>>>> >>>>> That is not a correct summary of the ASFs position. We do not >>>>> *develop* software that is under any licence other than ALv2 (go to >>>>> apache-extras). As far as I understand it the extensions site does no= t >>>>> provide development support. >>>>> >>>>> We do not distribute incompatibly licensed code that might restrict >>>>> the rights of our downstream users to *modify* the source of our >>>>> projects. Since none of the extensions will be bundled with AOO >>>>> releases this is not relevant. >>>>> >>>> >>>> You seem to be saying that anything not forbidden may be allowed. >>> >>> No, I'm saying that as a mentor of the AOO podling, as a long standing = Member of The Apache Software Foundation and as a current VP of the foundat= ion I believe that I have a pretty good feel for why things are the way the= y are. This allows me to, with reasonable confidence, guess at what would b= e allowed and what would not. >>> >> >> As always, thanks Ross for your mentor's wise words of advise. =C2=A0But= I >> personally am having difficulties determining sometimes whether you >> are merely giving mentorly advice versus actively advocating, like a >> PMC member, for one particular outcome over another. =C2=A0 If your inte= nt >> really is to argue against the SF proposal (which is how it looks to >> me) then maybe we can just get a clean, unadorned argument for that >> position, one with fewer hats. =C2=A0So far I've seen no one else but yo= u >> argue that position, so it would be good for the overall discussion to >> hear it, from you personally. =C2=A0I think that would be allowed, =C2= =A0right? > > I'm reading this thread. The message is that ASF policy is flexible to a = certain extent. It is not like a corporation's policy which is likely to be= bureaucratically inflexible. Rob, would you please try to get used to that= ;-) > It is very easy Dave, to dismiss someone who works for a large corporation by suggesting that they are bureaucratic and inflexible and otherwise have a defective thinking process. This slur is a form of personal attack and I suggest you (and others) drop it. No one has questioned whether or not we can appeal to the IPMC or the ASF Board and change policy. This is obviously possible. But it obviously requires time, effort and has an uncertain outcome. So let's not say it is impossible. But let's also not say it is the only path, or even the easiest path. > The proposal is now somewhat buried in this long thread. > > There are issues to decide. > > (1) What is the AOO vision of extensions, templates in the longer term (o= r even AOO 3.4)? > > (2) How do we get Extensions and Templates stable? > > (3) How do we disconnect E and T from using Oracle infrastructure for use= rids and passwords? > > >> >>> At the very least, I know the boundaries of my knowledge and I know who= to ask once I know what to ask. Hence this thread. > > Thank you! > > Regards, > Dave > > > >>> >>> Ross >