You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@commons.apache.org by Costin Manolache <cm...@yahoo.com> on 2002/10/21 04:43:06 UTC
License and copyright issues
The following was posted by Roy Fielding:
"Just look at the commons cvs -- there is code present
that was taken from another open source project, the license removed,
and replaced with the committer's own copyright alongside that of the
ASF. That isn't just contrary to our guidelines; it is immoral!
And, it has been there for four months without anyone so much as
lifting a finger (not to mention deleting the module, which is what
I would have done). If that isn't cause to terminate an entire project,
I don't know what is."
This is a very serious accusation, and it seems other people
are aware of this issue - yet neither jakarta-commons nor
jakarta PMC have been informed ( at least to my knowledge ).
We may have too much traffic - or maybe people don't know
about pmc@jakarta.apache.org, or maybe those who claim 'we don't
care' are right.
As you should know, it is our duty to review the code that
is checked in and make sure it respect some basic rules.
I think it is essential for us to find the code and
find out how this happened and how it can be prevented in the
future. Nothing is perfect - and it is possible that people
don't understand the rules or just didn't think.
I can't find many excuses for whoever noticed and who knew about that and
failed to notify the community or the PMC - and I include Roy here. But
that doesn't change the fact that we have a serious and major problem -
I think it is our fault in the first place as commons commiters for letting
such a thing happen.
Since I still can't find out what code he is reffering to - I would like
to ask for your support in identifying it ( and fixing the problem,
of course ), and then to discuss and try to find out solutions to
avoid this in future.
Costin
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: License and copyright issues
Posted by Costin Manolache <cm...@yahoo.com>.
Dmitri Plotnikov wrote:
> Costin,
>
> When PLOTNIX was OFFICIALLY contributing this code to Apache, I copied
> the license from some other Apache source file, which had IIRC Lotus
> mentioned as the original contributor.
>
> The original JXPath was not an Open Source project, it had an
> Apache-style license and was distributed freely with the source. I
> wrote the original version in its entirety.
>
> Just let me know what change needs to be made to the license and
> whether I need to make some changes to the disclaimer on my website.
AFAIK things are fine - I personally don't see any problem with that.
However you should ask the pmc ( pmc@jakarta.apache.org ), just
to be sure.
I've seen similar things in httpd and other projects.
Costin
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: License and copyright issues
Posted by Dmitri Plotnikov <dp...@yahoo.com>.
Costin,
When PLOTNIX was OFFICIALLY contributing this code to Apache, I copied
the license from some other Apache source file, which had IIRC Lotus
mentioned as the original contributor.
The original JXPath was not an Open Source project, it had an
Apache-style license and was distributed freely with the source. I
wrote the original version in its entirety.
Just let me know what change needs to be made to the license and
whether I need to make some changes to the disclaimer on my website.
- Dmitri
--- Costin Manolache <cm...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> That may be a problem. I remember seeing similar statements
> even in httpd code, and it is not a different copyright - it
> just indicates that the code was originally based on some code
> that was donated to ASF ( which is just a true fact )
>
> It is true, tomcat ( when donated by Sun ) didn't include such
> a statement.
>
> Ok, we need to find out if this is indeed a problem or not. Or
> just ask jxpath commiters to remove it - but I think we should
> first get an answer that this is wrong.
> If it is not wrong - it would just remove a very fair attribution.
>
> Dmitri - I assume you didn't 'take this code from another open
> source project' and replaced copyright. No offense please, I have to
> ask.
>
> Costin
>
> Michael A. Smith wrote:
>
> > The closest I can identify is jxpath which contains this at the end
> of
> > the license in each source file[1]:
> >
> > * This software consists of voluntary contributions made by many
> > * individuals on behalf of the Apache Software Foundation and was
> > * originally based on software copyright (c) 2001, Plotnix, Inc,
> > * <http://www.plotnix.com/>.
> > * For more information on the Apache Software Foundation, please
> see
> > * <http://www.apache.org/>.
> >
> > Where typical apache code contains only:
> >
> > * This software consists of voluntary contributions made by many
> > * individuals on behalf of the Apache Software Foundation. For
> more
> > * information on the Apache Software Foundation, please see
> > * <http://www.apache.org/>.
> >
> > However, I can't imagine this would be the source of the problem
> since
> > this project has been in CVS for over a year now (Aug 23, 2001),
> not 4
> > months, as Roy specifies. I should also note that it has had
> active
> > participation by an Apache member (craigmcc), and on the plotnix
> > website, there is the statement:
> >
> > "JXPath was initially developed by Dmitri Plotnikov at PLOTNIX and
> then
> > contributed to the Apache Jakarta project. The new home of JXPath
> is
> > Jakarta Commons"[2]
> >
> > And Dmitri Plotnikov is a committer here, actively developing
> JXPath.
> >
> > Thus, I'm not sure this is the problem that Roy was referring to.
> > That's why I asked Roy (and Ken Coar) on the reorg list to specify
> the
> > problem[3]. I have yet to hear back.
> >
> > Any other ideas what the problem may be?
> >
> > regards,
> > michael
> >
> > [1] For example,
> >
>
http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs/jakarta-commons/jxpath/src/java/org/apache/commons/jxpath/AbstractFactory.java?rev=1.4&content-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup
> >
> > [2] http://www.plotnix.com
> >
> > [3] reorg-get.578_578@apache.org
> >
> > Costin Manolache wrote:
> >> The following was posted by Roy Fielding:
> >>
> >> "Just look at the commons cvs -- there is code present
> >> that was taken from another open source project, the license
> removed,
> >> and replaced with the committer's own copyright alongside that of
> the
> >> ASF. That isn't just contrary to our guidelines; it is immoral!
> >> And, it has been there for four months without anyone so much as
> >> lifting a finger (not to mention deleting the module, which is
> what
> >> I would have done). If that isn't cause to terminate an entire
> project,
> >> I don't know what is."
> >>
> >> This is a very serious accusation, and it seems other people
> >> are aware of this issue - yet neither jakarta-commons nor
> >> jakarta PMC have been informed ( at least to my knowledge ).
> >> We may have too much traffic - or maybe people don't know
> >> about pmc@jakarta.apache.org, or maybe those who claim 'we don't
> >> care' are right.
> >>
> >> As you should know, it is our duty to review the code that
> >> is checked in and make sure it respect some basic rules.
> >>
> >> I think it is essential for us to find the code and
> >> find out how this happened and how it can be prevented in the
> >> future. Nothing is perfect - and it is possible that people
> >> don't understand the rules or just didn't think.
> >>
> >> I can't find many excuses for whoever noticed and who knew about
> that and
> >> failed to notify the community or the PMC - and I include Roy
> here. But
> >> that doesn't change the fact that we have a serious and major
> problem -
> >> I think it is our fault in the first place as commons commiters
> for
> >> letting such a thing happen.
> >>
> >> Since I still can't find out what code he is reffering to - I
> would like
> >> to ask for your support in identifying it ( and fixing the
> problem,
> >> of course ), and then to discuss and try to find out solutions to
> >> avoid this in future.
> >>
> >> Costin
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> >> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org> For additional
> >> commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
> --
> Costin
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Y! Web Hosting - Let the expert host your web site
http://webhosting.yahoo.com/
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: License and copyright issues
Posted by Costin Manolache <cm...@yahoo.com>.
That may be a problem. I remember seeing similar statements
even in httpd code, and it is not a different copyright - it
just indicates that the code was originally based on some code
that was donated to ASF ( which is just a true fact )
It is true, tomcat ( when donated by Sun ) didn't include such
a statement.
Ok, we need to find out if this is indeed a problem or not. Or
just ask jxpath commiters to remove it - but I think we should
first get an answer that this is wrong.
If it is not wrong - it would just remove a very fair attribution.
Dmitri - I assume you didn't 'take this code from another open
source project' and replaced copyright. No offense please, I have to ask.
Costin
Michael A. Smith wrote:
> The closest I can identify is jxpath which contains this at the end of
> the license in each source file[1]:
>
> * This software consists of voluntary contributions made by many
> * individuals on behalf of the Apache Software Foundation and was
> * originally based on software copyright (c) 2001, Plotnix, Inc,
> * <http://www.plotnix.com/>.
> * For more information on the Apache Software Foundation, please see
> * <http://www.apache.org/>.
>
> Where typical apache code contains only:
>
> * This software consists of voluntary contributions made by many
> * individuals on behalf of the Apache Software Foundation. For more
> * information on the Apache Software Foundation, please see
> * <http://www.apache.org/>.
>
> However, I can't imagine this would be the source of the problem since
> this project has been in CVS for over a year now (Aug 23, 2001), not 4
> months, as Roy specifies. I should also note that it has had active
> participation by an Apache member (craigmcc), and on the plotnix
> website, there is the statement:
>
> "JXPath was initially developed by Dmitri Plotnikov at PLOTNIX and then
> contributed to the Apache Jakarta project. The new home of JXPath is
> Jakarta Commons"[2]
>
> And Dmitri Plotnikov is a committer here, actively developing JXPath.
>
> Thus, I'm not sure this is the problem that Roy was referring to.
> That's why I asked Roy (and Ken Coar) on the reorg list to specify the
> problem[3]. I have yet to hear back.
>
> Any other ideas what the problem may be?
>
> regards,
> michael
>
> [1] For example,
>
http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs/jakarta-commons/jxpath/src/java/org/apache/commons/jxpath/AbstractFactory.java?rev=1.4&content-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup
>
> [2] http://www.plotnix.com
>
> [3] reorg-get.578_578@apache.org
>
> Costin Manolache wrote:
>> The following was posted by Roy Fielding:
>>
>> "Just look at the commons cvs -- there is code present
>> that was taken from another open source project, the license removed,
>> and replaced with the committer's own copyright alongside that of the
>> ASF. That isn't just contrary to our guidelines; it is immoral!
>> And, it has been there for four months without anyone so much as
>> lifting a finger (not to mention deleting the module, which is what
>> I would have done). If that isn't cause to terminate an entire project,
>> I don't know what is."
>>
>> This is a very serious accusation, and it seems other people
>> are aware of this issue - yet neither jakarta-commons nor
>> jakarta PMC have been informed ( at least to my knowledge ).
>> We may have too much traffic - or maybe people don't know
>> about pmc@jakarta.apache.org, or maybe those who claim 'we don't
>> care' are right.
>>
>> As you should know, it is our duty to review the code that
>> is checked in and make sure it respect some basic rules.
>>
>> I think it is essential for us to find the code and
>> find out how this happened and how it can be prevented in the
>> future. Nothing is perfect - and it is possible that people
>> don't understand the rules or just didn't think.
>>
>> I can't find many excuses for whoever noticed and who knew about that and
>> failed to notify the community or the PMC - and I include Roy here. But
>> that doesn't change the fact that we have a serious and major problem -
>> I think it is our fault in the first place as commons commiters for
>> letting such a thing happen.
>>
>> Since I still can't find out what code he is reffering to - I would like
>> to ask for your support in identifying it ( and fixing the problem,
>> of course ), and then to discuss and try to find out solutions to
>> avoid this in future.
>>
>> Costin
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org> For additional
>> commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
--
Costin
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: License and copyright issues
Posted by "Michael A. Smith" <ma...@apache.org>.
The closest I can identify is jxpath which contains this at the end of
the license in each source file[1]:
* This software consists of voluntary contributions made by many
* individuals on behalf of the Apache Software Foundation and was
* originally based on software copyright (c) 2001, Plotnix, Inc,
* <http://www.plotnix.com/>.
* For more information on the Apache Software Foundation, please see
* <http://www.apache.org/>.
Where typical apache code contains only:
* This software consists of voluntary contributions made by many
* individuals on behalf of the Apache Software Foundation. For more
* information on the Apache Software Foundation, please see
* <http://www.apache.org/>.
However, I can't imagine this would be the source of the problem since
this project has been in CVS for over a year now (Aug 23, 2001), not 4
months, as Roy specifies. I should also note that it has had active
participation by an Apache member (craigmcc), and on the plotnix
website, there is the statement:
"JXPath was initially developed by Dmitri Plotnikov at PLOTNIX and then
contributed to the Apache Jakarta project. The new home of JXPath is
Jakarta Commons"[2]
And Dmitri Plotnikov is a committer here, actively developing JXPath.
Thus, I'm not sure this is the problem that Roy was referring to.
That's why I asked Roy (and Ken Coar) on the reorg list to specify the
problem[3]. I have yet to hear back.
Any other ideas what the problem may be?
regards,
michael
[1] For example,
http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs/jakarta-commons/jxpath/src/java/org/apache/commons/jxpath/AbstractFactory.java?rev=1.4&content-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup
[2] http://www.plotnix.com
[3] reorg-get.578_578@apache.org
Costin Manolache wrote:
> The following was posted by Roy Fielding:
>
> "Just look at the commons cvs -- there is code present
> that was taken from another open source project, the license removed,
> and replaced with the committer's own copyright alongside that of the
> ASF. That isn't just contrary to our guidelines; it is immoral!
> And, it has been there for four months without anyone so much as
> lifting a finger (not to mention deleting the module, which is what
> I would have done). If that isn't cause to terminate an entire project,
> I don't know what is."
>
> This is a very serious accusation, and it seems other people
> are aware of this issue - yet neither jakarta-commons nor
> jakarta PMC have been informed ( at least to my knowledge ).
> We may have too much traffic - or maybe people don't know
> about pmc@jakarta.apache.org, or maybe those who claim 'we don't
> care' are right.
>
> As you should know, it is our duty to review the code that
> is checked in and make sure it respect some basic rules.
>
> I think it is essential for us to find the code and
> find out how this happened and how it can be prevented in the
> future. Nothing is perfect - and it is possible that people
> don't understand the rules or just didn't think.
>
> I can't find many excuses for whoever noticed and who knew about that and
> failed to notify the community or the PMC - and I include Roy here. But
> that doesn't change the fact that we have a serious and major problem -
> I think it is our fault in the first place as commons commiters for letting
> such a thing happen.
>
> Since I still can't find out what code he is reffering to - I would like
> to ask for your support in identifying it ( and fixing the problem,
> of course ), and then to discuss and try to find out solutions to
> avoid this in future.
>
> Costin
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: License and copyright issues
Posted by "Michael A. Smith" <ma...@apache.org>.
I found another possibility (checked in around 3 months, 10 days ago,
much closer to Roy's 4 month statement). Unfortunately, my archive of
the CVS commits doesn't go back all the way, but I did comment on it at
the time it was committed, and I have a copy of the message I sent,
along with the response I got from the person that committed the code.
Since I am not a member, nor on the PMC, I let the issue drop, figuring
that a member or someone from the PMC would take it up with the board or
whomever if it was really necessary. See attached messages.
regards,
michael
[daemon] unlicensed files
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk>.
i've gone through the files in daemon and find there are a number of files
that don't include the apache license text and two which have headers
which are not apache licenses.
what is to be done?
c header files lacking apache licenses
--------------------------------------
src/native/unix/native/executables/vdmoniadm/resource.h
src/native/unix/native/executables/vdmonisvc/resource.h
src/native/unix/native/moni_inst.h
c source files lacking apache licenses
--------------------------------------
src/native/unix/native/signals.c
src/native/unix/native/moni/vdmonisvc.c
src/native/unix/native/service/instmain.c
src/native/unix/native/signals/kill.c
files with non-apache headers
-----------------------------
src/native/unix/native/moni/vdmoniadm.c
src/native/unix/native/supcalls_nt/vdenv.c
- robert
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: License and copyright issues
Posted by "Michael A. Smith" <ma...@apache.org>.
robert burrell donkin wrote:
> from http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/charter.html
>
> "16.The committers shall elect a committee of three committers to
> provide general oversight, in the style of the Jakarta PMC."
>
> maybe this would be a start...?
+1. Yes, that means I'm willing, but I could certainly use some
help/training with determining what my what's "ok" and what's not.
regards,
michael
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: License and copyright issues
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk>.
On Monday, October 21, 2002, at 06:29 AM, Costin Manolache wrote:
> dion@multitask.com.au wrote:
>
>> I care, but without knowing what the problem is, it's really hard to fix.
>
> I don't know either.
>
> But we need to find a solution and find this code - and to be able
> to handle this better in the future. ( i.e. find some better policy
> or mechanisms, have more information for everyone about who should
> be contacted and when and what to look for - any idea is welcomed )
from http://jakarta.apache.org/commons/charter.html
"16.The committers shall elect a committee of three committers to provide
general oversight, in the style of the Jakarta PMC."
maybe this would be a start...?
- robert
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: License and copyright issues
Posted by Jean-Francois Arcand <jf...@apache.org>.
dion@multitask.com.au wrote:
>Maybe, but that's pretty old.
>
>How about we agree to do this:
>a) Between us, scan all source in the sandbox looking for license
>violations (we can each pick projects to scan)
>b) Collate them back here
>c) Contact the committers responsible and ask for a resolution
>d) If the committers don't come up with a resolution, we remove the code.
>
>Votes?
>
+1...I'm not an active committer, but I can certainly help. I recommend
somedody creates a task distribution list an assign some volonteer to
each package.
-- Jeanfrancois
>--
>dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
>Work: http://www.multitask.com.au
>Developers: http://adslgateway.multitask.com.au/developers
>
>
>robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote on
>22/10/2002 07:37:11 AM:
>
>
>
>>On Monday, October 21, 2002, at 06:29 AM, Costin Manolache wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>dion@multitask.com.au wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>I care, but without knowing what the problem is, it's really hard to
>>>>
>>>>
>fix.
>
>
>>>I don't know either.
>>>
>>>
>>maybe...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs/jakarta-commons-sandbox/daemon/src/native/nt/
>
>
>>moni/vdmoniadm.c?rev=1.1.1.1&content-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup
>>
>>- robert
>>
>>
>>--
>>To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>
>>
><ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
>
>>For additional commands, e-mail:
>>
>>
><ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
>
>
>
>
>>ForwardSourceID:NT00083716
>>
>>
>
>--
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
>
>
>
Re: License and copyright issues
Posted by Martin van den Bemt <ml...@mvdb.net>.
Checked all the jars (skipped the one from apache)
simplestore
has
hdsqldb.jar
jdbm.jar
xmldb.jar
not from apache (afaik) and no license files checked in
jjar has MinML2.jar checked from wilson.co.ukls and no license file
With license file I mean the license file that should be added to the
jar.
Mvgr,
Martin
On Tue, 2002-10-22 at 02:09, dion@multitask.com.au wrote:
> Maybe, but that's pretty old.
>
> How about we agree to do this:
> a) Between us, scan all source in the sandbox looking for license
> violations (we can each pick projects to scan)
> b) Collate them back here
> c) Contact the committers responsible and ask for a resolution
> d) If the committers don't come up with a resolution, we remove the code.
>
> Votes?
> --
> dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
> Work: http://www.multitask.com.au
> Developers: http://adslgateway.multitask.com.au/developers
>
>
> robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote on
> 22/10/2002 07:37:11 AM:
>
> >
> > On Monday, October 21, 2002, at 06:29 AM, Costin Manolache wrote:
> >
> > > dion@multitask.com.au wrote:
> > >
> > >> I care, but without knowing what the problem is, it's really hard to
> fix.
> > >
> > > I don't know either.
> >
> > maybe...
> >
> >
> http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs/jakarta-commons-sandbox/daemon/src/native/nt/
> > moni/vdmoniadm.c?rev=1.1.1.1&content-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup
> >
> > - robert
> >
> >
> > --
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> > For additional commands, e-mail:
> <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> >
>
> > ForwardSourceID:NT00083716
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: License and copyright issues
Posted by di...@multitask.com.au.
Maybe, but that's pretty old.
How about we agree to do this:
a) Between us, scan all source in the sandbox looking for license
violations (we can each pick projects to scan)
b) Collate them back here
c) Contact the committers responsible and ask for a resolution
d) If the committers don't come up with a resolution, we remove the code.
Votes?
--
dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
Work: http://www.multitask.com.au
Developers: http://adslgateway.multitask.com.au/developers
robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote on
22/10/2002 07:37:11 AM:
>
> On Monday, October 21, 2002, at 06:29 AM, Costin Manolache wrote:
>
> > dion@multitask.com.au wrote:
> >
> >> I care, but without knowing what the problem is, it's really hard to
fix.
> >
> > I don't know either.
>
> maybe...
>
>
http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs/jakarta-commons-sandbox/daemon/src/native/nt/
> moni/vdmoniadm.c?rev=1.1.1.1&content-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup
>
> - robert
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail:
<ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
> ForwardSourceID:NT00083716
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: License and copyright issues
Posted by robert burrell donkin <ro...@blueyonder.co.uk>.
On Monday, October 21, 2002, at 06:29 AM, Costin Manolache wrote:
> dion@multitask.com.au wrote:
>
>> I care, but without knowing what the problem is, it's really hard to fix.
>
> I don't know either.
maybe...
http://cvs.apache.org/viewcvs/jakarta-commons-sandbox/daemon/src/native/nt/
moni/vdmoniadm.c?rev=1.1.1.1&content-type=text/vnd.viewcvs-markup
- robert
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: License and copyright issues
Posted by Costin Manolache <cm...@yahoo.com>.
dion@multitask.com.au wrote:
> I care, but without knowing what the problem is, it's really hard to fix.
I don't know either.
But we need to find a solution and find this code - and to be able
to handle this better in the future. ( i.e. find some better policy
or mechanisms, have more information for everyone about who should
be contacted and when and what to look for - any idea is welcomed )
I don't have too many ideas - it is the commons nature to have many
commiters and components of many kinds, and I don't think anyone can
or will be able to verify each and every file all the time.
Maybe we can split this among ourself ? Have rotating groups
of 3-4 people every week ?
I think it is our responsibility ( as jakarta-commons commiters )
to find solutions and decide what to do. Other people think that the PMC
should spend all its time policing projects. If this is the only
way and we can't address the problem, and the PMC ( and ASF ) can't trust
our community for taking care of the codebase and to follow the rules - I
refuse to be part of such thing.
Right now (IMO) the policy in jakarta is to trust each subproject
and let its commiters make all the decisions ( including reviewing the
code ). It seems some people don't think this work - and
jakarta-commons is pointed as example.
Costin
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: License and copyright issues
Posted by "Michael A. Smith" <ma...@apache.org>.
On Mon, 21 Oct 2002, Paul Cantrell wrote:
> Pardon my question -- I'm new to this list, and it may be a bit dense
> -- but why can't we just ask Roy Fielding what he was talking about?
I've seen a couple of messages on the reorg list (including one I sent
myself), most of which explicitly CC'd him, that have asked for more
specific information to back his allegations. I have yet to see a
response.
> Or is this some sort of rite of passage in which the young apprentices
> must prove themselves unaided?
I hope not.
> It seems to me that open communication is a bare essential for
> preventing problems like this in the future -- not to mention solving
> the one at hand!
agreed.
regards,
michael
>
> Cheers,
>
> Paul
>
> > The following was posted by Roy Fielding:
> >
> > "Just look at the commons cvs -- there is code present
> > that was taken from another open source project, the license removed,
> > and replaced with the committer's own copyright alongside that of the
> > ASF. That isn't just contrary to our guidelines; it is immoral!
> > And, it has been there for four months without anyone so much as
> > lifting a finger (not to mention deleting the module, which is what
> > I would have done). If that isn't cause to terminate an entire
> > project,
> > I don't know what is."
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Paul Cantrell http://eidola.org http://innig.net
>
>
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
> For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: License and copyright issues
Posted by Paul Cantrell <ca...@pobox.com>.
Pardon my question -- I'm new to this list, and it may be a bit dense
-- but why can't we just ask Roy Fielding what he was talking about?
Or is this some sort of rite of passage in which the young apprentices
must prove themselves unaided?
It seems to me that open communication is a bare essential for
preventing problems like this in the future -- not to mention solving
the one at hand!
Cheers,
Paul
> The following was posted by Roy Fielding:
>
> "Just look at the commons cvs -- there is code present
> that was taken from another open source project, the license removed,
> and replaced with the committer's own copyright alongside that of the
> ASF. That isn't just contrary to our guidelines; it is immoral!
> And, it has been there for four months without anyone so much as
> lifting a finger (not to mention deleting the module, which is what
> I would have done). If that isn't cause to terminate an entire
> project,
> I don't know what is."
_________________________________________________________________
Paul Cantrell http://eidola.org http://innig.net
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
Re: License and copyright issues
Posted by di...@multitask.com.au.
news <ne...@main.gmane.org> wrote on 21/10/2002 12:43:06 PM:
> The following was posted by Roy Fielding:
>
> "Just look at the commons cvs -- there is code present
> that was taken from another open source project, the license removed,
> and replaced with the committer's own copyright alongside that of the
> ASF. That isn't just contrary to our guidelines; it is immoral!
> And, it has been there for four months without anyone so much as
> lifting a finger (not to mention deleting the module, which is what
> I would have done). If that isn't cause to terminate an entire project,
> I don't know what is."
>
> This is a very serious accusation, and it seems other people
> are aware of this issue - yet neither jakarta-commons nor
> jakarta PMC have been informed ( at least to my knowledge ).
> We may have too much traffic - or maybe people don't know
> about pmc@jakarta.apache.org, or maybe those who claim 'we don't
> care' are right.
I care, but without knowing what the problem is, it's really hard to fix.
> As you should know, it is our duty to review the code that
> is checked in and make sure it respect some basic rules.
>
> I think it is essential for us to find the code and
> find out how this happened and how it can be prevented in the
> future. Nothing is perfect - and it is possible that people
> don't understand the rules or just didn't think.
>
> I can't find many excuses for whoever noticed and who knew about that
and
> failed to notify the community or the PMC - and I include Roy here. But
> that doesn't change the fact that we have a serious and major problem -
> I think it is our fault in the first place as commons commiters for
letting
> such a thing happen.
>
> Since I still can't find out what code he is reffering to - I would like
> to ask for your support in identifying it ( and fixing the problem,
> of course ), and then to discuss and try to find out solutions to
> avoid this in future.
I'll happily remove it, but don't know what it is....What else should
happen??
--
dIon Gillard, Multitask Consulting
Work: http://www.multitask.com.au
Developers: http://adslgateway.multitask.com.au/developers
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: <ma...@jakarta.apache.org>