www-community mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Carlos Sanchez <car...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Returned post for committers@apache.org
Date Thu, 28 Jan 2010 04:18:43 GMT
Talking about our own dogfood, it probably makes a better argument
Nexus (used in the ASF) vs Archiva (Apache project)


On Wed, Jan 27, 2010 at 8:10 PM, Henri Yandell <hyandell@gmail.com> wrote:
> I question the labeling of Cobertura as our dogfood and Clover as not
> our dogfood.
>
> Which is 'our dogfood', the GPL product or the proprietary product
> built on top of permissively licensed Open Source (not that I know if
> Clover is like this; but I've heard the same argument against JIRA)?
>
> Do we support the "Open Source movement", whatever that might be
> described as today, or our users?
>
> Hen
>
> On Wed, Dec 23, 2009 at 11:56 AM, Gary Gregory <garydgregory@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi All:
>>
>> [I am replying here to message (below) posted on committers@a.o on
>> 12/20/2009 03:17 by Michael McCandless]
>>
>> As an open source community, I feel we should eat our own open source
>> philosophy dog food and use open source software whenever possible. I've
>> used Cobertura for a while now on various Commons projects and at work and
>> its reports are just as useful and pretty as Clover. I also believe that
>> each project community is free to do what it feels serves it best.
>>
>> At this time, though, I wonder what Clover offer that is so much better than
>> Cobertura to merit put aside what I feel is an important philosophical
>> point.
>>
>> What we do at Apache for this type of issue is very important IMO when we
>> think about the image and expertise that we project. We are a technical
>> community and people look to our choices as implicit guidance if not
>> endorsement. When we pick a commercial product like Clover over an open
>> source solution (like Cobertura), I feel we are telling the world that there
>> is no one in the open source space that could serve our need and that we had
>> to turn to a commercial product. That fact that we have a free license is
>> besides the point.
>>
>> My 2c,
>> Gary
>> ----------------------------------------------------
>> On 12/20/2009 03:17, Michael McCandless wrote:
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> Atlassian has generously donated a site license to Apache for Clover
>> 2.6, to test code coverage for any source code under org.apache.
>>
>> We've checked the license in here:
>>
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/committers/donated-licenses/clover/2.6.x/
>>
>> In Atlassian's words: The license is available to anyone working on
>> the org.apache.* be it in IDEA/Eclipse/Ant/Maven locally, or on a
>> central build server.  Since the license will only instrument and
>> report coverage on org.apache packages, please mention that it is fine
>> to commit this license to each project if it makes running builds
>> easier. ie just check out the project and run with Clover, without the
>> need for the extra step of locating and installing the clover license.
>>
>> Uwe Schindler has worked with Atlassian to upgrade Lucene's nightly
>> build to use Clover 2.6 and the resulting report is great, eg:
>>
>> http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Lucene-trunk/lastSuccessfulBuild/clover-report
>>
>> Feel free to fold into your build, use Clover during development, etc.
>>
>> Mike
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org


Mime
View raw message