You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@lucenenet.apache.org by Aaron Powell <me...@aaron-powell.com> on 2011/02/18 10:47:27 UTC
Luke.Net
A while ago I started working on a port of Luke for .NET, and a colleague of mine also gave a bit of a hand.
Neither of us have time to run this project so I'm throwing it open if anyone else wants to work on it you'll find the repo here: http://hg.slace.biz/luke.net/overview
Nothing overly exciting, it's a basic WPF app so far, running Lucene.Net 2.9.2, .NET 4.0, VS2010, etc.
Aaron Powell
Umbraco Core Team Member<http://umbraco.codeplex.com/> | FunnelWeb Team Member<http://funnelweblog.com/>
http://www.aaron-powell.com<http://www.aaron-powell.com/> | http://twitter.com/slace | Skype: aaron.l.powell | MSN: aazzap@hotmail.com<ma...@hotmail.com>
Re: [Lucene.Net] Re: Luke.Net
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On 2011-02-21, Troy Howard wrote:
> As a general question about process around accepting software
> contributions, one thing I'm a little confused about: How does
> accepting this contribution differ from a normal contribution?
Not much.
> By that I mean, suppose a developer contributed a significant patch to
> our code, through the normal process or attaching a patch to a JIRA
> ticket. My understanding is that they don't need to sign a CLA or
> other legal paperwork to do that, as long as the committers who
> ultimately apply the patch have those on file.
As long as they have checked the checkbox that says "yes, you may use
it".
> What are the criteria that determine when something needs additional
> legal paperwork (like a grant/contributor CLA/etc)?
This is some sort of gray area. There are certain cases where the
answer is easy. If we talk about a few lines of patch then we don't
need a CLA, if it is a big existing project with several contributors we
need CLAs or SGAs. For anything in between it is a judgement call.
In Luke.NET's case we have at least two people who've worked on the code
base. Even if Aaron attached the code to a JIRA ticket and checked the
"this is a contribution" checkbox that could not cover the work of his
collegue.
Stefan
[Lucene.Net] Re: Luke.Net
Posted by Troy Howard <th...@gmail.com>.
Stefan,
As a general question about process around accepting software
contributions, one thing I'm a little confused about: How does
accepting this contribution differ from a normal contribution? By that
I mean, suppose a developer contributed a significant patch to our
code, through the normal process or attaching a patch to a JIRA
ticket. My understanding is that they don't need to sign a CLA or
other legal paperwork to do that, as long as the committers who
ultimately apply the patch have those on file.
What are the criteria that determine when something needs additional
legal paperwork (like a grant/contributor CLA/etc)?
Thanks,
Troy
On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 10:45 PM, Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 2011-02-18, Troy Howard wrote:
>
>> Pending resolution of the legal issues around ingesting the code into
>> Lucene.Net,
>
> All it takes is:
>
> * attach the code to a JIRA ticket.
>
> * have software grants signed by all contributors to the original code
> base.
>
> * write a single page for the Incubator site
>
> * start a vote on Incubator general and wait for 72 hours.
>
> I've done this several times and it's not as painful as one might think.
>
> Stefan
>
Re: Luke.Net
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On 2011-02-18, Troy Howard wrote:
> Pending resolution of the legal issues around ingesting the code into
> Lucene.Net,
All it takes is:
* attach the code to a JIRA ticket.
* have software grants signed by all contributors to the original code
base.
* write a single page for the Incubator site
* start a vote on Incubator general and wait for 72 hours.
I've done this several times and it's not as painful as one might think.
Stefan
Re: Luke.Net
Posted by Troy Howard <th...@gmail.com>.
Pending resolution of the legal issues around ingesting the code into
Lucene.Net, I've created a public fork of Luke.Net on bitbucket as a
staging area to prepare the code for ingestion. Sergey will be working
on it there.
Thanks,
Troy
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 6:23 AM, Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 2011-02-18, Aaron Powell wrote:
>
>> Yeah I'm actually quite lax about remembering to put license on my
>> code. I've just thrown up the MIT license on it.
>
> Thanks.
>
>> I'll speak to my colleague, but I know I didn't work on it during work time
>
> Depending on your legislation (and your contract) your employer may even
> own code you write on your own.
>
> Cheers
>
> Stefan
>
RE: Luke.Net
Posted by Aaron Powell <me...@aaron-powell.com>.
No, they don't own the code, we know that from our employment contract already ;)
Aaron Powell
Umbraco Core Team Member | FunnelWeb Team Member
http://www.aaron-powell.com | http://twitter.com/slace | Skype: aaron.l.powell | MSN: aazzap@hotmail.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@apache.org]
Sent: Saturday, 19 February 2011 1:24 AM
To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Luke.Net
On 2011-02-18, Aaron Powell wrote:
> Yeah I'm actually quite lax about remembering to put license on my
> code. I've just thrown up the MIT license on it.
Thanks.
> I'll speak to my colleague, but I know I didn't work on it during work
> time
Depending on your legislation (and your contract) your employer may even own code you write on your own.
Cheers
Stefan
Re: Luke.Net
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On 2011-02-18, Aaron Powell wrote:
> Yeah I'm actually quite lax about remembering to put license on my
> code. I've just thrown up the MIT license on it.
Thanks.
> I'll speak to my colleague, but I know I didn't work on it during work time
Depending on your legislation (and your contract) your employer may even
own code you write on your own.
Cheers
Stefan
RE: Luke.Net
Posted by Aaron Powell <me...@aaron-powell.com>.
Yes, most features aren't implemented, we started but both have other OSS projects that take priority. Luke.Net was more a playground to learn WPF.
Aaron Powell
Umbraco Core Team Member | FunnelWeb Team Member
http://www.aaron-powell.com | http://twitter.com/slace | Skype: aaron.l.powell | MSN: aazzap@hotmail.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Sergey Mirvoda [mailto:sergey@mirvoda.com]
Sent: Saturday, 19 February 2011 1:08 AM
To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Luke.Net
Alternatively we can reimplement it from scratch.
Using Aarron's code as a working prototype.
Also looks like my most wished (and somewhat advanced) features (testing Analizers and Luke plugins) is not implemented.
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Aaron Powell <me...@aaron-powell.com> wrote:
> Yeah I'm actually quite lax about remembering to put license on my code.
> I've just thrown up the MIT license on it.
>
> I'll speak to my colleague, but I know I didn't work on it during work
> time
>
> Aaron Powell
> Umbraco Core Team Member | FunnelWeb Team Member
>
> http://www.aaron-powell.com | http://twitter.com/slace | Skype:
> aaron.l.powell | MSN: aazzap@hotmail.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@apache.org]
> Sent: Friday, 18 February 2011 10:50 PM
> To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Luke.Net
>
> On 2011-02-18, Troy Howard wrote:
>
> > Sergey is already planning to include the Apache License header in
> > the files when he imports them. Other than that, is there any legal
> > process we need to go through to bring this code into the Lucene.Net
> > fold?
>
> Yes, absolutely.
>
> First of all you can't change the license without Aaron's consent -
> and that of all other people who have contributed to Luke.NET so far
> (I'm assuming it is just Aaron's colleague). I've just performed a
> cursory look right now and can't find any information about Luke.NET's current license.
>
> Second we'd need a software grant by Aaron and his colleague.
> Alternatively Aaron and his colleague could sign ICLAs but for
> complete code imports a sofware grant is preferred. See <
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/>. If the code was created on company
> time Aaron may need to check with his employer and have the employer
> sign a SGA or CCLA, but he'll know better than us.
>
> Finally we'd have to follow the IP-Clearance process <
> http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html> before the code
> can be imported.
>
> Sorry if this sounds a bit like too much legal hassle, but this is the
> only way the ASF can be sure it has all necessary rights to actually
> distribute the code.
>
> Stefan
>
--
--Regards, Sergey Mirvoda
Re: Luke.Net
Posted by Sergey Mirvoda <se...@mirvoda.com>.
Alternatively we can reimplement it from scratch.
Using Aarron's code as a working prototype.
Also looks like my most wished (and somewhat advanced) features (testing
Analizers and Luke plugins) is not implemented.
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 5:01 PM, Aaron Powell <me...@aaron-powell.com> wrote:
> Yeah I'm actually quite lax about remembering to put license on my code.
> I've just thrown up the MIT license on it.
>
> I'll speak to my colleague, but I know I didn't work on it during work time
>
> Aaron Powell
> Umbraco Core Team Member | FunnelWeb Team Member
>
> http://www.aaron-powell.com | http://twitter.com/slace | Skype:
> aaron.l.powell | MSN: aazzap@hotmail.com
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@apache.org]
> Sent: Friday, 18 February 2011 10:50 PM
> To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Luke.Net
>
> On 2011-02-18, Troy Howard wrote:
>
> > Sergey is already planning to include the Apache License header in the
> > files when he imports them. Other than that, is there any legal
> > process we need to go through to bring this code into the Lucene.Net
> > fold?
>
> Yes, absolutely.
>
> First of all you can't change the license without Aaron's consent - and
> that of all other people who have contributed to Luke.NET so far (I'm
> assuming it is just Aaron's colleague). I've just performed a cursory look
> right now and can't find any information about Luke.NET's current license.
>
> Second we'd need a software grant by Aaron and his colleague.
> Alternatively Aaron and his colleague could sign ICLAs but for complete
> code imports a sofware grant is preferred. See <
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/>. If the code was created on company time
> Aaron may need to check with his employer and have the employer sign a SGA
> or CCLA, but he'll know better than us.
>
> Finally we'd have to follow the IP-Clearance process <
> http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html> before the code can
> be imported.
>
> Sorry if this sounds a bit like too much legal hassle, but this is the only
> way the ASF can be sure it has all necessary rights to actually distribute
> the code.
>
> Stefan
>
--
--Regards, Sergey Mirvoda
RE: Luke.Net
Posted by Aaron Powell <me...@aaron-powell.com>.
Yeah I'm actually quite lax about remembering to put license on my code. I've just thrown up the MIT license on it.
I'll speak to my colleague, but I know I didn't work on it during work time
Aaron Powell
Umbraco Core Team Member | FunnelWeb Team Member
http://www.aaron-powell.com | http://twitter.com/slace | Skype: aaron.l.powell | MSN: aazzap@hotmail.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Stefan Bodewig [mailto:bodewig@apache.org]
Sent: Friday, 18 February 2011 10:50 PM
To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org
Subject: Re: Luke.Net
On 2011-02-18, Troy Howard wrote:
> Sergey is already planning to include the Apache License header in the
> files when he imports them. Other than that, is there any legal
> process we need to go through to bring this code into the Lucene.Net
> fold?
Yes, absolutely.
First of all you can't change the license without Aaron's consent - and that of all other people who have contributed to Luke.NET so far (I'm assuming it is just Aaron's colleague). I've just performed a cursory look right now and can't find any information about Luke.NET's current license.
Second we'd need a software grant by Aaron and his colleague.
Alternatively Aaron and his colleague could sign ICLAs but for complete code imports a sofware grant is preferred. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/>. If the code was created on company time Aaron may need to check with his employer and have the employer sign a SGA or CCLA, but he'll know better than us.
Finally we'd have to follow the IP-Clearance process <http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html> before the code can be imported.
Sorry if this sounds a bit like too much legal hassle, but this is the only way the ASF can be sure it has all necessary rights to actually distribute the code.
Stefan
Re: Luke.Net
Posted by Stefan Bodewig <bo...@apache.org>.
On 2011-02-18, Troy Howard wrote:
> Sergey is already planning to include the Apache License header in the
> files when he imports them. Other than that, is there any legal
> process we need to go through to bring this code into the Lucene.Net
> fold?
Yes, absolutely.
First of all you can't change the license without Aaron's consent - and
that of all other people who have contributed to Luke.NET so far (I'm
assuming it is just Aaron's colleague). I've just performed a cursory
look right now and can't find any information about Luke.NET's current
license.
Second we'd need a software grant by Aaron and his colleague.
Alternatively Aaron and his colleague could sign ICLAs but for complete
code imports a sofware grant is preferred. See
<http://www.apache.org/licenses/>. If the code was created on company
time Aaron may need to check with his employer and have the employer
sign a SGA or CCLA, but he'll know better than us.
Finally we'd have to follow the IP-Clearance process
<http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html> before the code
can be imported.
Sorry if this sounds a bit like too much legal hassle, but this is the
only way the ASF can be sure it has all necessary rights to actually
distribute the code.
Stefan
Re: Luke.Net
Posted by Troy Howard <th...@gmail.com>.
Aaron,
Sweet! Hopefully we can repay the favour by making Lucene.Net even
more amazing for Umbraco.
Was this a port from the Luke code or was this a conceptual re-write?
Stephan,
Sergey is already planning to include the Apache License header in the
files when he imports them. Other than that, is there any legal
process we need to go through to bring this code into the Lucene.Net
fold?
Thanks,
Troy
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Sergey Mirvoda <se...@mirvoda.com> wrote:
> I can take it.
>
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Aaron Powell <me...@aaron-powell.com> wrote:
>
>> Nope, I've got enough open source projects on my plate that if the
>> Lucene.Net team wants to take over one of them I'm not complaining
>>
>> Aaron Powell
>> Umbraco Core Team Member | FunnelWeb Team Member
>>
>> http://www.aaron-powell.com | http://twitter.com/slace | Skype:
>> aaron.l.powell | MSN: aazzap@hotmail.com
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Troy Howard [mailto:thoward37@gmail.com]
>> Sent: Friday, 18 February 2011 8:51 PM
>> To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org
>> Cc: Aaron Powell
>> Subject: Re: Luke.Net
>>
>> Aaron,
>>
>> That's awesome!
>>
>> Would you be opposed to us importing this in the Lucene.Net respository,
>> and maintaining it here?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Troy
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 1:47 AM, Aaron Powell <me...@aaron-powell.com> wrote:
>> > A while ago I started working on a port of Luke for .NET, and a colleague
>> of mine also gave a bit of a hand.
>> >
>> > Neither of us have time to run this project so I'm throwing it open if
>> > anyone else wants to work on it you'll find the repo here:
>> > http://hg.slace.biz/luke.net/overview
>> >
>> > Nothing overly exciting, it's a basic WPF app so far, running Lucene.Net
>> 2.9.2, .NET 4.0, VS2010, etc.
>> >
>> > Aaron Powell
>> > Umbraco Core Team Member<http://umbraco.codeplex.com/> | FunnelWeb
>> > Team Member<http://funnelweblog.com/>
>> >
>> > http://www.aaron-powell.com<http://www.aaron-powell.com/> |
>> > http://twitter.com/slace | Skype: aaron.l.powell | MSN:
>> > aazzap@hotmail.com<ma...@hotmail.com>
>> >
>> >
>>
>
>
>
> --
> --Regards, Sergey Mirvoda
>
Re: Luke.Net
Posted by Sergey Mirvoda <se...@mirvoda.com>.
I can take it.
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Aaron Powell <me...@aaron-powell.com> wrote:
> Nope, I've got enough open source projects on my plate that if the
> Lucene.Net team wants to take over one of them I'm not complaining
>
> Aaron Powell
> Umbraco Core Team Member | FunnelWeb Team Member
>
> http://www.aaron-powell.com | http://twitter.com/slace | Skype:
> aaron.l.powell | MSN: aazzap@hotmail.com
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Troy Howard [mailto:thoward37@gmail.com]
> Sent: Friday, 18 February 2011 8:51 PM
> To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org
> Cc: Aaron Powell
> Subject: Re: Luke.Net
>
> Aaron,
>
> That's awesome!
>
> Would you be opposed to us importing this in the Lucene.Net respository,
> and maintaining it here?
>
> Thanks,
> Troy
>
>
> On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 1:47 AM, Aaron Powell <me...@aaron-powell.com> wrote:
> > A while ago I started working on a port of Luke for .NET, and a colleague
> of mine also gave a bit of a hand.
> >
> > Neither of us have time to run this project so I'm throwing it open if
> > anyone else wants to work on it you'll find the repo here:
> > http://hg.slace.biz/luke.net/overview
> >
> > Nothing overly exciting, it's a basic WPF app so far, running Lucene.Net
> 2.9.2, .NET 4.0, VS2010, etc.
> >
> > Aaron Powell
> > Umbraco Core Team Member<http://umbraco.codeplex.com/> | FunnelWeb
> > Team Member<http://funnelweblog.com/>
> >
> > http://www.aaron-powell.com<http://www.aaron-powell.com/> |
> > http://twitter.com/slace | Skype: aaron.l.powell | MSN:
> > aazzap@hotmail.com<ma...@hotmail.com>
> >
> >
>
--
--Regards, Sergey Mirvoda
RE: Luke.Net
Posted by Aaron Powell <me...@aaron-powell.com>.
Nope, I've got enough open source projects on my plate that if the Lucene.Net team wants to take over one of them I'm not complaining
Aaron Powell
Umbraco Core Team Member | FunnelWeb Team Member
http://www.aaron-powell.com | http://twitter.com/slace | Skype: aaron.l.powell | MSN: aazzap@hotmail.com
-----Original Message-----
From: Troy Howard [mailto:thoward37@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, 18 February 2011 8:51 PM
To: lucene-net-dev@lucene.apache.org
Cc: Aaron Powell
Subject: Re: Luke.Net
Aaron,
That's awesome!
Would you be opposed to us importing this in the Lucene.Net respository, and maintaining it here?
Thanks,
Troy
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 1:47 AM, Aaron Powell <me...@aaron-powell.com> wrote:
> A while ago I started working on a port of Luke for .NET, and a colleague of mine also gave a bit of a hand.
>
> Neither of us have time to run this project so I'm throwing it open if
> anyone else wants to work on it you'll find the repo here:
> http://hg.slace.biz/luke.net/overview
>
> Nothing overly exciting, it's a basic WPF app so far, running Lucene.Net 2.9.2, .NET 4.0, VS2010, etc.
>
> Aaron Powell
> Umbraco Core Team Member<http://umbraco.codeplex.com/> | FunnelWeb
> Team Member<http://funnelweblog.com/>
>
> http://www.aaron-powell.com<http://www.aaron-powell.com/> |
> http://twitter.com/slace | Skype: aaron.l.powell | MSN:
> aazzap@hotmail.com<ma...@hotmail.com>
>
>
Re: Luke.Net
Posted by Troy Howard <th...@gmail.com>.
Aaron,
That's awesome!
Would you be opposed to us importing this in the Lucene.Net
respository, and maintaining it here?
Thanks,
Troy
On Fri, Feb 18, 2011 at 1:47 AM, Aaron Powell <me...@aaron-powell.com> wrote:
> A while ago I started working on a port of Luke for .NET, and a colleague of mine also gave a bit of a hand.
>
> Neither of us have time to run this project so I'm throwing it open if anyone else wants to work on it you'll find the repo here: http://hg.slace.biz/luke.net/overview
>
> Nothing overly exciting, it's a basic WPF app so far, running Lucene.Net 2.9.2, .NET 4.0, VS2010, etc.
>
> Aaron Powell
> Umbraco Core Team Member<http://umbraco.codeplex.com/> | FunnelWeb Team Member<http://funnelweblog.com/>
>
> http://www.aaron-powell.com<http://www.aaron-powell.com/> | http://twitter.com/slace | Skype: aaron.l.powell | MSN: aazzap@hotmail.com<ma...@hotmail.com>
>
>