river-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Patricia Shanahan <p...@acm.org>
Subject Re: Attic? Was: Re: Lotj - languages other than java
Date Mon, 04 Jul 2016 15:47:45 GMT
See https://attic.apache.org/ for an introduction.

The question I am raising is whether River is viable as an Apache 
project, not whether it is a valuable body of code. Your second 
paragraph is exactly my point.

Apache brings some good stuff to its projects in the form of licensing 
with carefully controlled provenance and signed, tested releases. The 
downside is a process that is incompatible with Github, and some 
bureaucracy around the release process.

If that is not currently the right trade-off for River the best thing to 
do is to move to the attic. Any individual, or group of individuals, can 
download the code and use it any way they like that is compatible with 
Apache's license, which allows a lot. In particular, people who agree on 
a direction can start their own Github repository based on the River 
code. They do have to preserve some notices and make it clear that they 
have modified the code. See http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0 
for details.

Patricia

On 7/4/2016 7:49 AM, Bryan Thompson wrote:
> I am just not that familiar with Apache policy.  However, river is a real,
> functional, deployed in use platform.   I certainly agree that there is
> deadlock at this point in terms of the people and process.  However, I am
> not sure that an attic is the right place for a well grounded and fielded
> technology.  While the community might not be able to move ahead along a
> clear roadmap, there is still support from the community for the technology.
>
> Maybe a move to github would help to break things loose?  Open up the
> development and release process more?  Right now things are hung up in part
> on Apache process. Maybe Apache is just not the right place at this time
> for this technology?
>
> Thanks,
> Bryan
>
> On Mon, Jul 4, 2016 at 10:08 AM, Patricia Shanahan <pats@acm.org> wrote:
>
>> I think it is time to raise on the user list moving River to the attic.
>>
>> There is no sign of progress on a release. What interest there is in
>> development seems to be going in different directions. Using portions of
>> River code in other projects would still be feasible with it in the attic,
>> but there would be no need for a PMC, and board reports.
>>
>> Patricia
>>
>> On 7/4/2016 6:44 AM, Simon IJskes - QCG wrote:
>> ...
>>
>>> But then again, there are a lot of people reading this, and a big part
>>> of them having no interest at all in incompatible improvements, and i
>>> see no other option than leaving them behind, with a jini compatible
>>> maintenance release. This will certainly tear the river community apart,
>>> or at least cause a lot of friction. So when i see only the two of us,
>>> moving in a new direction, i can't help feeling, what is the use of it
>>> all.
>>>
>>> G. Simon
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>

Mime
View raw message