www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Robert Samuel Newson <rnew...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Include build tool source?
Date Mon, 03 Feb 2014 19:15:51 GMT


I think the simplest thing here is for rebar to be a system requirement. Every current CouchDB
developer is capable of doing that, and we’ll help new folks as needed. If it becomes an
issue, we can trivially automate the fetching/building/whatever of rebar in a ./configure
or ./bootstrap file. We might end up having to anyway to ensure we’re all using the same
version (built against the right erlang release, if that turns out to matter).


On 3 Feb 2014, at 18:33, Kevan Miller <kevan.miller@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Mon Feb 03 2014 at 10:29:17 AM, Kevan Miller <kevan.miller@gmail.com> wrote:
> 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
> Oops. Finger check...
> IIRC, you only want this as an aid to your developers and not released. It does beg the
question of what your source code "release" looks like. Would it include or not include Rebar?
> --kevan

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

View raw message