Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
  h=X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type;
  b=376CNj9JbofaPjcc3B8i1789rAF771MPeZto8VUXYvMKqAS1ZaaLBXQkIpjf/5lb0P2aZBrw037IoTD4BLGDGMqbWh79VEBWbsQGt/a65OmsyIFnbYSysiXQhh2nCFdwHCBGvDtE1odT+ZrIQVuLNY8+WGjiUxesvxsWK7G+LHs=;
References: <1338428718.42092.YahooMailClassic@web113506.mail.gq1.yahoo.com>
 <4FC75BEA.1070808@a-w-f.de>
 <CAKQbXgB3Rs4UJ2=BVbU8BdR4kED671=WSViO2VeM1pxccJ9udQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <4FC790BE.3050008@googlemail.com> <4FC79BA7.1060707@apache.org>
 <CAKQbXgCXRVHLVe3rrOPp0NZLD-aitQ6XQk+jtrAjzfW-RLtF6g@mail.gmail.com>
 <4FC8826B.2090600@googlemail.com>
 <CAKQbXgBcZ96LP273Q6E1SD2GpMDQDLCzAhrg3erp5YA3NbbMAw@mail.gmail.com>
 <4FC894F5.9070900@googlemail.com>
 <CAKQbXgA0s53QWOeL_qh1pBkF9RmT7GHGBGBf9khNsQgRYXu-CA@mail.gmail.com>
 <4FC96773.5090109@apache.org>
 <CAP-ksogpV7Fx-FOp3avrQ-zDsV+qjuwiUE_QY=_GNByjtXY=4g@mail.gmail.com>
 <1338644475.5916.YahooMailNeo@web160904.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Message-ID: <1338645642.36383.YahooMailNeo@web160906.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
Date: Sat, 2 Jun 2012 07:00:42 -0700 (PDT)
From: Joe Schaefer <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com>
Reply-To: Joe Schaefer <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Moving Category-B tarballs (was Re: [PROPOSAL] Starting the
 graduation process)
To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org>
In-Reply-To: <1338644475.5916.YahooMailNeo@web160904.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="967773369-171014747-1338645642=:36383"

--967773369-171014747-1338645642=:36383
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Furthermore addressing this issue from a legal perspective=0Amisses the poi=
nt- the org will certainly permit you to=0Adistribute Category-B sources fo=
r things that only are useful=0Awhen compiled on the target host.=A0 The po=
int is that=0Ayou should be distributing dependencies from either the=0Amir=
rors using a deps (source) tarball,=A0 or you should fetch them=0Afrom thei=
r non-apache original locations.=A0 Longstanding=0Ainfra policy is that *on=
ly* our mirror system is appropriate=0Afor distributing source releases and=
 their dependencies.=0ADistribution of "tarballs" in support of a release=
=0Adirectly from svn.a.o violates infra policy just=0Aas much as distributi=
on from any other apache.org website=0Awould be.=A0 I'm not sure we've writ=
ten this down anywhere=0Abut it is certainly well-understood as infra polic=
y for=0Aas long as I have worked here as a contractor.=0A=0AHTH=0A=0A=0A=0A=
=0A>________________________________=0A> From: Joe Schaefer <joe_schaefer@y=
ahoo.com>=0A>To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" <ooo-dev@incubator.apache.o=
rg> =0A>Sent: Saturday, June 2, 2012 9:41 AM=0A>Subject: Re: Moving Categor=
y-B tarballs (was Re: [PROPOSAL] Starting the graduation process)=0A> =0A>F=
WIW, part of migrating to a TLP involves relocating=0A>your svn tree to top=
-level, thereby breaking any links=0A>to svn urls in 3.4.0's source tarball=
.=A0 No we do not=0A>support redirects for svn.a.o, and I doubt Subversion=
=0A>does either.=0A>=0A>I trust 3.4.1 will therefore address this issue pro=
perly=0A>going forward.=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>=0A>>_______________________________=
_=0A>> From: Rob Weir <robweir@apache.org>=0A>>To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache=
.org =0A>>Sent: Saturday, June 2, 2012 9:37 AM=0A>>Subject: Re: Moving Cate=
gory-B tarballs (was Re: [PROPOSAL] Starting the graduation process)=0A>> =
=0A>>On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 9:08 PM, Pedro Giffuni <pfg@apache.org> wrote:=
=0A>>> Hi Ross;=0A>>>=0A>>> I don't think it's "my turn" since my issues re=
main unresolved.=0A>>>=0A>>=0A>>I think Ross's idea was to stop batting thi=
s back and forth at a high=0A>>level, and instead focus on a specific file.=
=A0 So get into the details=0A>>rather than talking about generalities.=0A>=
>=0A>>So if you had to pick a single tarball that best makes your case for=
=0A>>it being a violation of policy, what would it be?=A0 Which one best=0A=
>>illustrates your concern?=0A>>=0A>>Then we can talk about the details of =
that file.=0A>>=0A>>-Rob=0A>>=0A>>> However let me recap:=0A>>>=0A>>> 1) I =
think just having patches that can or cannot be applied=0A>>> to category-B=
 licensed code is OK as long as it is not the=0A>>> default.=0A>>>=0A>>> 2)=
 I don't think we are allowed to distribute source tarballs=0A>>> in subver=
sion. The argument in the legal FAQ would seem=0A>>> not to be specific eno=
ugh:=0A>>> http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#category-b=0A>>>=0A>>>=
 " Software under the following licenses may be included in binary form=0A>=
>> within an Apache=0A>>> product if the inclusion is appropriately labeled=
"=0A>>>=0A>>> Redistribution of Category B in small quantities is also perm=
itted but=0A>>> both clarifications clearly imply including source code the=
 size and=0A>>> complexity of Mozilla Seamonkey is prohibited.=0A>>>=0A>>> =
The draft on which the policy was based is very clear:=0A>>> http://www.apa=
che.org/legal/3party.html#criteriaandcategories=0A>>>=0A>>> "Although the s=
ource must not be included in Apache products, the NOTICE=0A>>> file, which=
 is required to be included in each ASF distribution,*must point=0A>>> to t=
hesource <http://www.apache.org/legal/3party.html#define-source>form of=0A>=
>> the included binary*(more on that in the forthcoming "Receiving and=0A>>=
> Releasing Contributions" document)."=0A>>>=0A>>> I don't think anyone is =
arguing here that the principle has changed and=0A>>> that we can include C=
ategory-B software=0A>>>=0A>>> 3) EPL and other licenses state that we must=
 point to the source code=0A>>> used to generate the binary and this has al=
ready been pointed out by=0A>>> external developers like the COIN-OR guys.=
=0A>>>=0A>>> We are currently carrying outdated versions of Seamonkey=0A>>>=
 and saxon in SVN and we are unable to point to the sources due=0A>>> to 2 =
reasons:=0A>>>=0A>>> 1) The specific source code is not available upstream =
anymore.=0A>>>=0A>>> 2) If the code is enabled (which is the default in the=
 buildbots),=0A>>> the specific source code is patched during the build.=0A=
>>> I sustain that by keeping these sources in our SVN tree=0A>>> we are fo=
r all purposes forking the code and to some extent=0A>>> becoming the new u=
pstream maintainers. Even if the original=0A>>> code is available upstream =
I still don't see a good reason=0A>>> to carry that code under version cont=
rol.=0A>>>=0A>>> 4) I can't find a precedent among any other Apache Project=
=0A>>> where the ASF distributes Category-B sources in SVN, so I=0A>>> thin=
k hosting them would require a specific approval by=0A>>> legal@.=0A>>>=0A>=
>> My understanding is that there is work being done to have=0A>>> these is=
sues solved on Monday.=0A>>>=0A>>> Pedro.=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>>=0A>>> On 06/01/=
12 18:09, Ross Gardler wrote:=0A>>>>=0A>>>> Just bringing this item back to=
 the top. Nobody has linked to a policy=0A>>>> that allows this or disallow=
s it yet. However, Pedro has indicated he=0A>>>> doesn't object to this spe=
cific case.=0A>>>>=0A>>>> Can we consider this one done? If so that is good=
 progress (thank you=0A>>>> Jurgen for making consensus possible on one spe=
cific case).=0A>>>>=0A>>>> Lets move onto the next one. Pedro raised a conc=
ern about a specific=0A>>>> case and, if I'm following right there isn't co=
nsenus on that one (I=0A>>>> wouldn't be surprised if I'm not following rig=
ht since I'm tired of=0A>>>> reading the arguments that go round in circles=
 and stopped as soon as=0A>>>> it descended again into non-specific cases).=
=0A>>>>=0A>>>> Can we have an equally detailed and clear description about =
the case=0A>>>> Pedro highlights? We only need the facts about the problem =
being=0A>>>> solved and the current solution, not the arguments for/against=
. Pedro,=0A>>>> I suggest it's your turn since Jurgen started the ball roll=
ing, Rob=0A>>>> can be up next (sorry to sound like a school teacher, pleas=
e think of=0A>>>> me as a conductor not a school teacher - I'm not trying t=
o patronise,=0A>>>> it's just it's very late here and I still have a client=
 deliverable=0A>>>> that AOO has stood in the way of for the last two days)=
.=0A>>>>=0A>>>> Once we have the facts laid out nice and cleanly lets seek =
pointers to=0A>>>> policy that allows or disallows the solution in place. I=
f pointers are=0A>>>> not possible lets take the specific case to the IPMC =
for=0A>>>> clarification.=0A>>>>=0A>>>> Ross=0A>>>>=0A>>>=0A>>=0A>>=0A>>=0A=
>=0A>
--967773369-171014747-1338645642=:36383--