www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kevan Miller <kevan.mil...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Include build tool source?
Date Mon, 03 Feb 2014 18:29:17 GMT
For the record, you can try something like: 'asf legal-discuss binaries in
svn'. Latest discussions I recall were back in April/May there were
discussions about open source fonts in svn:

http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/201304.mbox/browser

"What constitutes a source release?"

As Mark mentions, there have been cases where projects maintained private
Maven repos in svn. Causing issues for infra.

There has also been the issue of the ASF releasing source code, not
binaries. Putting binaries in your svn for release, is counter to this
practice. IIRC, you only want this as an aid to y

--kevan
On Sun Feb 02 2014 at 10:20:03 PM, Paul Davis <paul.joseph.davis@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Kevan,
>
> Do you have any specific keywords to search for. The Googling and
> reading I've done have pointed me very much to the opposite
> conclusion. Specifically [1] seems to suggest that this is acceptable.
> The questions posed in the FAQ:
>
> 1. Is it customarily part of distributions of running code?
>
> No. Rebar is a standard build tool and is not tied to the running
> program by any means. Rebar is only required during the compilation
> phase.
>
> 2. Has it been around for years and a de facto standard in its
> respective community?
>
> Yes. Its ~4 years old [2] and is the de facto standard for building Erlang
> projects. Its even customarily checked into Erlang project source
> repositories and has no real distribution beyond being included in
> VCS.
>
> 3. Is it made available under "library" or "lesser" licenses or
> otherwise containing an exception which ensures that usage of this
> tool does not affect the license of the code against which it is run?
>
> Yes. Its ASL 2.0.
>
>
> There's no question of source level compatibility here. Its just a
> procedural question. Do we really need to include the source and have
> a build step to build the build tool to build the project? Given the
> tool's license and the cited FAQ I would've thought this would be
> acceptable for inclusion. I haven't been able to find anything to the
> contrary but that is quite possibly just because I don't know what I
> should be looking for.
>
>
> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html#build-tools
> [2] https://github.com/rebar/rebar/commit/b7e2088c273708bd5ce46b3c135c20
> f2229c7ccf
>
>
> On Sun, Feb 2, 2014 at 10:36 PM, Kevan Miller <kevan.miller@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > In past discussions on this general subject, the answer has been -- no,
> > that's not ok. It's not really a "legal" question, but a question of
> policy
> > of an "open source" foundation.
> >
> > There are discussions in the archives for this mailing list. As I recall,
> > infra was against maintaining binaries in svn, also.
> >
> > --kevan
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sat, Feb 1, 2014 at 4:54 AM, Robert Samuel Newson <rnewson@apache.org
> >
> > wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Given that the rebar project is ASLv2, I'm going to proceed with just
> >> including the rebar binary, with notes on the exact tree it was built
> from.
> >> The rebar binary will not be included in our release artifacts.
> >>
> >> B.
> >>
> >> On 28 Jan 2014, at 14:27, Robert Samuel Newson <rnewson@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > The Apache CouchDB team is working to incorporate two sizeable code
> >> > contributions which add many new features. CouchDB currently builds
> using
> >> > autotools but we have, as a team, decided to  switch to Rebar
> >> > (https://github.com/opscode/rebar), an erlang build tool licensed
> under the
> >> > ASLv2. Both contributions already use Rebar.
> >> >
> >> > Expecting users and developers to have rebar available, or easily
> >> > available, is not reasonable and so we intend to include the built,
> >> > cross-platform rebar binary in the root of our source repository
> (this is a
> >> > common practice among Erlang projects using Rebar).
> >> >
> >> > My question to legal is: Do we need to include the source from which
> our
> >> > build tool is built?
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Robert Newson
> >> >
> >>
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>
>

Mime
View raw message