mod_aspdotnet, initial clearance bullets

["William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>]

The following bullets need to be validated for mod_aspdotnet:

....-..-.. If applicable, make sure that any associated name does not already exist and check www.nameprotect.com to be sure that the name is not already trademarked for an existing software product. 

Status: I have checked nameprotect and other resources, spelt out, "aspdotnet"
has no hits against the US/Canadian databases as a mark.  There are dozens
of references to "aspdotnet" from google.  Nonetheless, the module name
mod_aspdotnet is not an invention of the ASF, but a descriptive term of what 
the module actually does, much like mod_ssl or mod_ldap.  I see no obstacles
either to the cli-dev (should that have been clr-dev?) project name or module 
name.  Other comments or thoughts?

....-..-.. Check and make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF been received. It is only necessary to transfer rights for the package, the core code, and any new code produced by the project. 

This is complete - since Jim is in receipt of that document, I'd love it if he
would commit the change to infrastructure/site/projects/httpd-cli.cwiki.

....-..-.. Check and make sure that the files that have been donated have been updated to reflect the new ASF copyright. 

This should be complete, but second pair of eyes is always nice.

....-..-.. Check that all active committers have a signed CLA on record. 

This is done already, and needs to be kept current as this project moves
from incubation to subproject status (I'm also certain pmc@httpd will
keep us honest in that respect.)  Has anyone recently joined looking for
commit access yet, for the mod_aspdotnet module, documentation,
website, or the mod_xxxxxx future Apache.Web. integration effort?

....-..-.. Remind active committers that they are responsible for ensuring that a Corporate CLA is recorded if such is is required to authorize their contributions under their individual CLA. 

AFAIK, anyone with a CLA on hand either filed this or does not need to.

....-..-.. Check and make sure that for all items included with the distribution that is not under the Apache license, we have the right to combine with Apache-licensed code and redistribute. 

There is nothing distributed that will not be under the Apache license.  The user
of mod_aspdotnet is expected to have .NET 1.0 or 1.1 installed, and the .msi
I've already described in the mod_aspdotnet tree will not bundle a .NET.

....-..-.. Check and make sure that all items depended upon by the project is covered by one or more of the following approved licenses: Apache, BSD, Artistic, MIT/X, MIT/W3C, MPL 1.1, or something with essentially the same terms. 

This is an interesting question :)  Certainly mod_aspdotnet requires .NET to
be installed, and presumes the adminstrator sets up the ASP.NETClientFiles
helper scripts to be served to the end user.  Aside from the implications
of the Microsoft Patent for the System.Web.Hosting implementation, it
appears they did not include the implementations of System.Web.Host
or System.Web.Request (which Apache.Web then superclasses) because
the Microsoft .NET team intended for the ASP.NET environment to be
pluggable into many different hosts, or containers.  These already include
several lightweight 'mini-server' implementations, an implementation within
the Web Matrix IDE, and even a command-line invoked console container.

As far as I am aware, we are no more encumbered by compiling and linking
to Microsoft's .NET runtime, than we would be by compiling and linking
Apache httpd web server with Visual Studio.

I did not find the license files in msdn.microsoft.com or www.asp.net such
that we could refer to them, so if anyone can track them down and post 
the URL for the framework 1.1 redistributable, I would appreciate it.

Additional feedback is welcomed.

Bill

Re: mod_aspdotnet, initial clearance bullets

["William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>]

At 03:26 PM 7/19/2004, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>The following bullets need to be validated for mod_aspdotnet:
>
>....-..-.. If applicable, make sure that any associated name does not already exist and check www.nameprotect.com to be sure that the name is not already trademarked for an existing software product. 
>
>Status: I have checked nameprotect and other resources, spelt out, "aspdotnet"
>has no hits against the US/Canadian databases as a mark.  There are dozens
>of references to "aspdotnet" from google.  Nonetheless, the module name
>mod_aspdotnet is not an invention of the ASF, but a descriptive term of what 
>the module actually does, much like mod_ssl or mod_ldap.  I see no obstacles
>either to the cli-dev (should that have been clr-dev?) project name or module 
>name.  Other comments or thoughts?

Seeing no objections, I'm marking this complete 2004-07-19

>....-..-.. Check and make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF been received. It is only necessary to transfer rights for the package, the core code, and any new code produced by the project. 
>
>This is complete - since Jim is in receipt of that document, I'd love it if he
>would commit the change to infrastructure/site/projects/httpd-cli.cwiki.

Since Jim committed the record of the grant rec'd, I'm using his commit date
of 2004-02-19.

>....-..-.. Check and make sure that the files that have been donated have been updated to reflect the new ASF copyright. 
>
>This should be complete, but second pair of eyes is always nice.

Seeing no objection, I'm using the tarball date of 2004-02-26 as the update
date for this step, completed.

>....-..-.. Check that all active committers have a signed CLA on record. 
>
>This is done already, and needs to be kept current as this project moves
>from incubation to subproject status (I'm also certain pmc@httpd will
>keep us honest in that respect.)  Has anyone recently joined looking for
>commit access yet, for the mod_aspdotnet module, documentation,
>website, or the mod_xxxxxx future Apache.Web. integration effort?

Verified this on 7-19-2004 when I sent the original message.

>....-..-.. Remind active committers that they are responsible for ensuring that a Corporate CLA is recorded if such is is required to authorize their contributions under their individual CLA. 
>
>AFAIK, anyone with a CLA on hand either filed this or does not need to.

This will be repeated when each committer is granted access.

>....-..-.. Check and make sure that for all items included with the distribution that is not under the Apache license, we have the right to combine with Apache-licensed code and redistribute. 
>
>There is nothing distributed that will not be under the Apache license.  The user
>of mod_aspdotnet is expected to have .NET 1.0 or 1.1 installed, and the .msi
>I've already described in the mod_aspdotnet tree will not bundle a .NET.

Marked as checked 2004-07-19, seeing no objections.

>....-..-.. Check and make sure that all items depended upon by the project is covered by one or more of the following approved licenses: Apache, BSD, Artistic, MIT/X, MIT/W3C, MPL 1.1, or something with essentially the same terms. 
>
>This is an interesting question :)  Certainly mod_aspdotnet requires .NET to
>be installed, and presumes the adminstrator sets up the ASP.NETClientFiles
>helper scripts to be served to the end user.  Aside from the implications
>of the Microsoft Patent for the System.Web.Hosting implementation, it
>appears they did not include the implementations of System.Web.Host
>or System.Web.Request (which Apache.Web then superclasses) because
>the Microsoft .NET team intended for the ASP.NET environment to be
>pluggable into many different hosts, or containers.  These already include
>several lightweight 'mini-server' implementations, an implementation within
>the Web Matrix IDE, and even a command-line invoked console container.
>
>As far as I am aware, we are no more encumbered by compiling and linking
>to Microsoft's .NET runtime, than we would be by compiling and linking
>Apache httpd web server with Visual Studio.

Seeing no argument, marking this complete 2004-07-19.  Remember, we will
never redistribute .NET or the isapi_aspnet.dll Microsoft modules.  The user
will be responsible for installing them, themselves.

Ian, incubator/site/projects/httpd-cli.cwiki is updated, could you regenerate
please?

Next step, finish the .bat / free MC++ compiler build system for this module, 
and create the release candidate for vote on httpd-cli.  Once/If accepted,
we will petition the incubator and httpd to accept us, as incubated.

Bill