You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to legal-discuss@apache.org by Henri Yandell <ba...@apache.org> on 2007/03/14 03:45:32 UTC
Re: About bundling JavaScript with frameworks
On 2/20/07, Roy T. Fielding <fi...@gbiv.com> wrote:
> On Feb 20, 2007, at 12:29 PM, Howard Lewis Ship wrote:
>
> > OK, just to double check:
> >
> > I can include outside works (the javascript libraries) in my project.
> >
> > The libraries will be checked into Apache SVN, but will maintain the
> > copyright notice of the original author.
>
> If they are outside libraries and you are not making changes to them,
> then they don't belong in our subversion. They should only be added
> to release builds.
Sorry for getting to this one late.
I don't think we can draw this line here - if the distribution will
contain the 3rd party library then keeping it in SVN seems prudent.
Otherwise you're at the whim and mercy of a 3rd party URL.
In many cases I suspect we don't keep it in SVN simply because it's
available from the Maven repository - so be it, but I don't think we
can take those cases to be the rule.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: About bundling JavaScript with frameworks
Posted by Henri Yandell <ba...@apache.org>.
On 3/14/07, Roy T. Fielding <fi...@gbiv.com> wrote:
> On Mar 13, 2007, at 7:45 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> > I don't think we can draw this line here - if the distribution will
> > contain the 3rd party library then keeping it in SVN seems prudent.
> > Otherwise you're at the whim and mercy of a 3rd party URL.
>
> So? That URL will change. If it disappears entirely, you had better
> have the source code on hand anyway.
>
> > In many cases I suspect we don't keep it in SVN simply because it's
> > available from the Maven repository - so be it, but I don't think we
> > can take those cases to be the rule.
>
> No, we don't keep it in SVN because it is a big honking file that
> isn't subject to version control and isn't in open source code form.
> Our foundation creates open source and ONLY open source -- binaries
> are only redistributed as a convenience to end-users with releases.
> If we have third-party code in subversion, then it is in source code
> form and it is there because we have made local changes. Otherwise,
> the module should not be in subversion -- it should be downloaded by
> whatever build script is used by the developers to construct a
> testable package.
Not a policy currently in force at the ASF. Even with the spread of
the Maven repository, there must be lots of projects left that have
lib/ directories etc.
This sounds like it isn't a legal issue - so we should move to another
list like Infra if we want it to be a policy.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: About bundling JavaScript with frameworks
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@gbiv.com>.
On Mar 13, 2007, at 7:45 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> I don't think we can draw this line here - if the distribution will
> contain the 3rd party library then keeping it in SVN seems prudent.
> Otherwise you're at the whim and mercy of a 3rd party URL.
So? That URL will change. If it disappears entirely, you had better
have the source code on hand anyway.
> In many cases I suspect we don't keep it in SVN simply because it's
> available from the Maven repository - so be it, but I don't think we
> can take those cases to be the rule.
No, we don't keep it in SVN because it is a big honking file that
isn't subject to version control and isn't in open source code form.
Our foundation creates open source and ONLY open source -- binaries
are only redistributed as a convenience to end-users with releases.
If we have third-party code in subversion, then it is in source code
form and it is there because we have made local changes. Otherwise,
the module should not be in subversion -- it should be downloaded by
whatever build script is used by the developers to construct a
testable package.
The only exceptions are for subversion modules that are not products,
like the site modules that usually contain whatever jars are necessary
to build the site.
....Roy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org