Return-Path: X-Original-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Delivered-To: archive-asf-public-internal@cust-asf2.ponee.io Received: from cust-asf.ponee.io (cust-asf.ponee.io [163.172.22.183]) by cust-asf2.ponee.io (Postfix) with ESMTP id D5B9F200D1E for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2017 01:50:06 +0200 (CEST) Received: by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) id D4421160BD5; Tue, 3 Oct 2017 23:50:06 +0000 (UTC) Delivered-To: archive-asf-public@cust-asf.ponee.io Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by cust-asf.ponee.io (Postfix) with SMTP id F25641609DE for ; Wed, 4 Oct 2017 01:50:05 +0200 (CEST) Received: (qmail 31366 invoked by uid 500); 3 Oct 2017 23:50:05 -0000 Mailing-List: contact legal-discuss-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: legal-discuss@apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list legal-discuss@apache.org Received: (qmail 31355 invoked by uid 99); 3 Oct 2017 23:50:04 -0000 Received: from pnap-us-west-generic-nat.apache.org (HELO spamd1-us-west.apache.org) (209.188.14.142) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 03 Oct 2017 23:50:04 +0000 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by spamd1-us-west.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at spamd1-us-west.apache.org) with ESMTP id F03DEDC811 for ; Tue, 3 Oct 2017 23:50:03 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at spamd1-us-west.apache.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 2.38 X-Spam-Level: ** X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.38 tagged_above=-999 required=6.31 tests=[DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=2, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM=0.5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=disabled Authentication-Results: spamd1-us-west.apache.org (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=gmail.com Received: from mx1-lw-eu.apache.org ([10.40.0.8]) by localhost (spamd1-us-west.apache.org [10.40.0.7]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cJVnja27RVEY for ; Tue, 3 Oct 2017 23:50:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pg0-f46.google.com (mail-pg0-f46.google.com [74.125.83.46]) by mx1-lw-eu.apache.org (ASF Mail Server at mx1-lw-eu.apache.org) with ESMTPS id 22FA05FDE0 for ; Tue, 3 Oct 2017 23:50:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pg0-f46.google.com with SMTP id b1so4076706pge.1 for ; Tue, 03 Oct 2017 16:50:02 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date:message-id:references:to; bh=TZcE+qeKNeTdod0QkKSwmaIUMiNbP4lVRMcExwksJXY=; b=KmbhG8fuyIlVUSTnQLakRSsLYRn4p066AU+Xn9h9WlGbod/z+zgHC32TBlCjpgZ7Fz kX46wGRkpg1Ky8kJ4y/Cb5MwYxzXFBLLs14i2wKwQ2R4Aw/NWhHcdhUEqN1Vg21rI9lL FgjaqdlS0y7KGZOu9RMkIjGrepE7FqxX4DzYPUriqbzkCDORJDFaJZNrwQXyVaAGNk1i kyMGb23Yi7aqfzBRu/DDD16wZwS11OjpIMGJnNu03Qp3Hz5+nt0qYE7up+9Rwlw8VC31 g1aSSfeLGxQi5GciJr6xzhDLUkXJzOQ4aWv79v31wdbJw1k3uczV3Te0eR+Mex2bmATc bjdg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date :message-id:references:to; bh=TZcE+qeKNeTdod0QkKSwmaIUMiNbP4lVRMcExwksJXY=; b=ikMMUMm+s18DFV7pSwsjJssJ1CgOWNzQwW9n1kg/ZJyES+C4PKEyaaAow04HAEjfkY XhhUI9mPzmIM9aazMidRkZFxMg56XlyET6LeKvp9dOKOFvZ5/LhDt2VFPXIk6EzP1yPM rCkeglNXg0jqZnxherMjHnsBaL6NIKwtlPN2/CdDiYjMiYlOBENsrH+6Rc6ypJ1VzWt9 k0LD2Mxvkwj34q2rjx8CsKY1rbqMoeW6ka1JSmmG7wxHOSmAGIWqKMTeYhQp0h7Bpy32 eNL5muarMxdF7sZdQh7ZuFft2yvBSTAWu+/Dlaffv2X/qn/4cqDJLcHb6hIZG56waoeI 9QlA== X-Gm-Message-State: AMCzsaXUenlslKFYpGa4y4wOzH0kFRrm645Kxfuivsrvrg5UJMnb0maK AX3hR5b4wtiwxz8sY8hfHEcz8k/B X-Google-Smtp-Source: AOwi7QDs/2QdbdLlGlPORUne1S6THRVG62a892EROEC2E/YKCraLlDbL0XP4aDs/UjNWblK7PSVdXw== X-Received: by 10.101.78.8 with SMTP id r8mr5834910pgt.306.1507074595005; Tue, 03 Oct 2017 16:49:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ?IPv6:2601:646:8080:69b0:458b:fba8:7993:cebd? ([2601:646:8080:69b0:458b:fba8:7993:cebd]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id x27sm23494625pfe.65.2017.10.03.16.49.53 (version=TLS1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-SHA bits=128/128); Tue, 03 Oct 2017 16:49:53 -0700 (PDT) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_938EB7E5-7779-422B-AB8F-F35FAF11F687" Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 9.3 \(3124\)) Subject: Re: Including / forking Apache 2.0 licensed code into an ASF project From: Craig Russell In-Reply-To: Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2017 16:49:52 -0700 Message-Id: <67591E5F-46BA-44C1-9C95-BDB39BE717FD@gmail.com> References: To: legal-discuss@apache.org X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3124) archived-at: Tue, 03 Oct 2017 23:50:07 -0000 --Apple-Mail=_938EB7E5-7779-422B-AB8F-F35FAF11F687 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > On Oct 3, 2017, at 1:08 PM, Emilian Bold = wrote: >=20 > The main concern is to provide this feature out of the box. In order = to do that we would need to be able to include the code, build binaries = and distribute everything. Yes. >=20 > The fixes are secondary. Of course, it's nice to submit upstream but = the point is you can't delay everything because a fix is not being = merged -- if we already have the code in the repository it makes sense = to apply the fix there, no? >=20 Yes. If the upstream project is slow in accepting your patches, or there = is disagreement (!) about the patches, it's fine to make the change here = and release it. Then it's a social issue getting agreement from the = upstream on the patches. And keeping the local fork as much as possible in sync with the upstream = has obvious benefits. Craig >=20 >=20 > --emi >=20 > On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 10:46 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz = > wrote: > On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 8:55 PM, Emilian Bold > wrote: > > ...More like an "integration fork" where small tweaks > > and fixes would be added to make the thing work with the existing = codebase > > or to fix bugs... >=20 > Wouldn't it be better to contribute those fixes to the Blazemeter = project? >=20 > https://github.com/Blazemeter/jmeter-bzm-plugins/commits/master = shows > activity, so I don't understand why that wouldn't work. >=20 > -Bertrand >=20 > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org = > For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org = >=20 >=20 Craig L Russell clr@apache.org --Apple-Mail=_938EB7E5-7779-422B-AB8F-F35FAF11F687 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
On Oct 3, 2017, at 1:08 PM, Emilian Bold <emilian.bold@gmail.com> wrote:

The main concern is to provide this feature out of the box. = In order to do that we would need to be able to include the code, build = binaries and distribute everything.

Yes.
The fixes are secondary. Of course, = it's nice to submit upstream but the point is you can't delay everything = because a fix is not being merged -- if we already have the code in the = repository it makes sense to apply the fix there, no?

Yes. If the = upstream project is slow in accepting your patches, or there is = disagreement (!) about the patches, it's fine to make the change here = and release it. Then it's a social issue getting agreement from the = upstream on the patches.

And keeping = the local fork as much as possible in sync with the upstream has obvious = benefits.

Craig


--emi

On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 10:46 = PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <bdelacretaz@apache.org> wrote:
On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at = 8:55 PM, Emilian Bold <emilian.bold@gmail.com> wrote:
> ...More like an "integration fork" where small tweaks
> and fixes would be added to make the thing work = with the existing codebase
> or to fix bugs...

Wouldn't it be better to contribute those fixes to the Blazemeter = project?

https://github.com/Blazemeter/jmeter-bzm-plugins/commits/master = shows
activity, so I don't understand why that wouldn't work.

-Bertrand

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



Craig L Russell
clr@apache.org

= --Apple-Mail=_938EB7E5-7779-422B-AB8F-F35FAF11F687--