openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mathias Bauer <>
Subject Re: Getting to our first build
Date Tue, 28 Jun 2011 16:35:00 GMT
On 28.06.2011 18:05, Greg Stein wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 28, 2011 at 07:34, Rob Weir<>  wrote:
>> ...
>> Hi Mathias,
>> I don't know whether my approach is feasible either.  I know we can
>> set properties on files in SVN.  You can retrieve them individually,
>> but I don't see a way to query them, e.g., list all files that don't
>> have a license property, or download all files that have a license
>> property set to Apache 2.0.
> I'm not entirely sure about tagging like this. An interesting idea, definitely.
> In any case, you're right in terms of Subversion's query capabilities.
> You can list properties of nodes, but you cannot form queries to
> return nodes with certain property configurations.
> I somewhat prefer managing the IP aspect with separate lists of files,
> rather than injecting that information into the repository.
>> So fa, I think that you've been doing most of the code investigations.
>>   So I'd trust your judgement on what the next steps should be.  Do you
>> have any thoughts what work remains for the next 1 or 2 weeks?  For
>> example, is Oracle currently reviewing the additional SGA requesets?
>> Or do we need to request this still?
> Nobody has made a request. Nobody has produced a list of files to request.
>> If I understand the rules at Apache (and it is certainly possible I
>> have this wrong, but in that case Im sure someone will quickly correct
>> me), a Podling can check in all of the code, including parts that are
>> LGPL/GPL. We can make builds from that.  But we are not permitted to
>> make a releases or to graduate from a podling until we have gone
>> through the IP checklist, including dealing with code that has an
>> incompatible license.
> You have this entirely correct. Thanks!
>> Of course, if you think you are close to having a "clean" version of
>> OOo ready to check in, then I don't want to interrupt the fine work
>> that you are already doing.  But in that case I think it would help if
>> we had a "roadmap" for the next couple of weeks, of what tasks
>> remains, so others can help as well.
> I still believe that we would like *history* rather than simply
> copying over "tip" from the old repository. Having that history in one
> repository is so incredibly useful to so many people, that I cannot
> see why we would skip it. It costs us pain *now*, but think about how
> long this codebase will live? Will people a decade from now want to
> use two repositories to investigate history?

So let me try to summarize:

We take the OOo source code with tag OOO340_m1 from, including the full history, means: we will 
just import it from hg to svn. Then we use the lists of "naughty" files 
I have created and remove the files with "svn remove" that may not stay 
in the Apache repository.

In result we will have some files with LGPL or MPL in our repository (in 
the history), but on "head" they will be removed. "head" will have only 
files that are owned by Oracle (and will get ASL from Oracle) and those 
files that are not owned by Oracle, but are part of the current OOo 
repository and have a license that is compatible with ASL.

Then we start to fix the build.

Is that correct?


> Cheers,
> -g

View raw message