tiles-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Reddin <gred...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Tiles Future
Date Fri, 10 Dec 2010 20:59:02 GMT
On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 2:32 PM, Antonio Petrelli
<antonio.petrelli@gmail.com> wrote:
> I think we need to wait a bit (half a year, probably?) to decide to
> move Tiles. Mick has great plans for Tiles :-)


> Good question. Take a look at this issue:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/TILES-404
> It is clear that they preferred fixing Tiles in a package built by
> them instead of patch official Tiles. The issue has been opened 6 days
> after publishing the package. Why?

Wow. That's very interesting. I wonder why they approach it like that
instead of contributing here. Of course, they did contribute here by
giving us a patch, but they didn't quite go all the way with it.

> iCLAs are pretty annoying (I am thinking of Struts team, where people
> need to sign an iCLA only to write docs)

Yes, they are an annoying bit of legal crap and even the fact that we
must have a barrier to entry is annoying. And it's an issue that's
been debated on several levels at the Foundation. However, the
reasoning behind this structure is very good. Apache's reputation has
been built on our ability to distribute software that is free of IP
encumbrances. That's why we can't let just anybody contribute IP to
the artifacts we distribute. We have to be able to ensure that we have
the right to distribute any IP included in a release package under our
free license. The ICLA, software grants, and barriers to entry ensure
that the people who commit something to our repository understand
that. We can therefore release our software with confidence and our
users can use it with confidence. You don't get that with any project
you download from Sourceforge or Google Code.


View raw message