You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@cocoon.apache.org by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@s-und-n.de> on 2004/02/05 14:39:33 UTC
Switching to licence 2.0?
What is the general feeling when we should switch to the 2.0 licence?
Before our 2.1.4 release or directly after the release? We have to do it
before 1 March 2004.
For more info, see here:
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?License2FAQ
WDYT?
Carsten
Re: Switching to licence 2.0?
Posted by Sylvain Wallez <sy...@apache.org>.
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>> Hey licensing@, can we switch to the 2.0 license right now? Are the
>> instructions of the wiki correct?
>
>
> I have updated them (they were correct, but were a bit too terse).
>
> I really hate having this kind of thing in a wiki. It should be under
> http://www.apache.org/dev/
I've seen the move. Yes, although the wiki is convenient for authoring,
it's better for material having legal implications not to be open to
public modification.
> Note that antoine has been working on a python script that is
> available in the committers/relicense module.
Ok, thanks a lot.
Sylvain
--
Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies
http://www.apache.org/~sylvain http://www.anyware-tech.com
{ XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }
Orixo, the opensource XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com
Re: Cocoon 2.0.5 release
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
On 06 Feb 2004, at 13:04, Joerg Heinicke wrote:
> I can wait til March :p
The re-licensing can be done before that. I looked at the Python script
in committers/ - but the warning in the README.txt scares me a bit.
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source Java & XML An Orixo Member
Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
Re: Cocoon 2.0.5 release
Posted by Joerg Heinicke <jo...@gmx.de>.
On 06.02.2004 12:53, Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>>>2.0.x? Do you really think there will be new releases in this branch?
>>
>>Yes, I would also like to see a 2.0.5 release as a final step for the
>>2.0 branch. After this we will only release security patches or similar.
>>But much effort has been put into the 2.0 branch in the more than half
>>year from the 2.0.4 and the 2.1 release. I don't want to see it lost.
>>
>>But before the release we should solve the one issue with a broken batik
>>JAR in 2.0:
>>http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26392
>
> I'm not against a 2.0.5 release, and I also think that it makes sense to
> "close the branch"; but I'm not able to do a release before March. So,
> I would be very happy if someone else would do it.
> Releasing 2.0.x is much more work than 2.1 as it has binary distributions
> which have to be tested against the different jdks etc. So be warned :)
I can wait til March :p
Joerg
RE: Cocoon 2.0.5 release (was: Switching to licence 2.0?)
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@s-und-n.de>.
Joerg Heinicke wrote:
>
> On 06.02.2004 10:07, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>
> >> Yes, this is a lot of work - and we have to do it on all branches where
> >> we expect new releases, so it might be safer to not only change 2.1.x
> >> and 2.2.x but also the 2.0.x branch.
> >
> > 2.0.x? Do you really think there will be new releases in this branch?
>
> Yes, I would also like to see a 2.0.5 release as a final step for the
> 2.0 branch. After this we will only release security patches or similar.
> But much effort has been put into the 2.0 branch in the more than half
> year from the 2.0.4 and the 2.1 release. I don't want to see it lost.
>
> But before the release we should solve the one issue with a broken batik
> JAR in 2.0:
> http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26392
>
I'm not against a 2.0.5 release, and I also think that it makes sense to
"close the branch"; but I'm not able to do a release before March. So,
I would be very happy if someone else would do it.
Releasing 2.0.x is much more work than 2.1 as it has binary distributions
which have to be tested against the different jdks etc. So be warned :)
Carsten
Cocoon 2.0.5 release (was: Switching to licence 2.0?)
Posted by Joerg Heinicke <jo...@gmx.de>.
On 06.02.2004 10:07, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
>> Yes, this is a lot of work - and we have to do it on all branches where
>> we expect new releases, so it might be safer to not only change 2.1.x
>> and 2.2.x but also the 2.0.x branch.
>
> 2.0.x? Do you really think there will be new releases in this branch?
Yes, I would also like to see a 2.0.5 release as a final step for the
2.0 branch. After this we will only release security patches or similar.
But much effort has been put into the 2.0 branch in the more than half
year from the 2.0.4 and the 2.1 release. I don't want to see it lost.
But before the release we should solve the one issue with a broken batik
JAR in 2.0:
http://nagoya.apache.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=26392
Joerg
Re: XQuery support?
Posted by Nicolas Toper <nt...@jouve.fr>.
Yes, it's not Cocoon's job to implement XQuery; I jsut know of eXist who
supports it now.
Do you know any OSS implementaitons?
Le Vendredi 06 Février 2004 12:48, Joerg Heinicke a écrit :
> On 06.02.2004 12:32, Nicolas Toper wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > Do you have any ideas about XQuery and Cocoon? Is there anything planned?
> >
> > I think it might be a good addition? If you're interested, I can write a
> > longer e-mail stating my ideas on this subject?
>
> I think Cocoon should not provide its own XQuery implementation but rely
> on external tools. Doesn't for example Saxon provide at least
> rudimentary XQuery support?
>
> Joerg
Re: XQuery support?
Posted by Brian McCallister <mc...@forthillcompany.com>.
On Feb 10, 2004, at 3:33 AM, Alan wrote:
> Saxon provides kickin' XQuery support. eXist is supporting XQuery as
> well, but I've not worked with it yet.
>
Have played with an embedded eXist some and found some annoying quirks
(crap handling of namespaces, mostly) but as long as you don't ask
anything too complicated of it, it seems to work very well. I haven't
played with the 1.0 beta yet so they may have fixed the namespace
issues (one of the big ugly ones is the "throw an exception because we
haven't implemented this, but make it a generic exception with no
explanation" type problem) I was hitting -- I never got a response on
the mailing list to the problems though =/
-Brian
Re: XQuery support?
Posted by Alan <al...@engrm.com>.
* Joerg Heinicke <jo...@gmx.de> [2004-02-06 11:46]:
> On 06.02.2004 12:32, Nicolas Toper wrote:
> >Hi,
> >
> >Do you have any ideas about XQuery and Cocoon? Is there anything planned?
> >I think it might be a good addition? If you're interested, I can write a
> >longer e-mail stating my ideas on this subject?
I am interested. I'm hacking out a persistence engine to work with
Cocoon and Saxon (XSLT 2.0 and XQuery 1.0) that supports XUpdate.
> I think Cocoon should not provide its own XQuery implementation but rely
> on external tools. Doesn't for example Saxon provide at least
> rudimentary XQuery support?
Saxon provides kickin' XQuery support. eXist is supporting XQuery as
well, but I've not worked with it yet.
--
Alan / alan@engrm.com
Re: XQuery support?
Posted by Joerg Heinicke <jo...@gmx.de>.
On 06.02.2004 12:32, Nicolas Toper wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Do you have any ideas about XQuery and Cocoon? Is there anything planned?
>
> I think it might be a good addition? If you're interested, I can write a
> longer e-mail stating my ideas on this subject?
I think Cocoon should not provide its own XQuery implementation but rely
on external tools. Doesn't for example Saxon provide at least
rudimentary XQuery support?
Joerg
XQuery support?
Posted by Nicolas Toper <nt...@jouve.fr>.
Hi,
Do you have any ideas about XQuery and Cocoon? Is there anything planned?
I think it might be a good addition? If you're interested, I can write a
longer e-mail stating my ideas on this subject?
Re: Switching to licence 2.0?
Posted by Steven Noels <st...@outerthought.org>.
On 06 Feb 2004, at 10:07, Sylvain Wallez wrote:
> +1. And let's use the licence by reference, i.e. have the short
> boilerplate notice in the source files.
+1 - yes please.
</Steven>
--
Steven Noels http://outerthought.org/
Outerthought - Open Source Java & XML An Orixo Member
Read my weblog at http://blogs.cocoondev.org/stevenn/
stevenn at outerthought.org stevenn at apache.org
Re: Switching to licence 2.0?
Posted by Sylvain Wallez <sy...@apache.org>.
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
<snip/>
>Yes, this is a lot of work - and we have to do it on all branches where
>we expect new releases, so it might be safer to not only change 2.1.x
>and 2.2.x but also the 2.0.x branch.
>
>
2.0.x? Do you really think there will be new releases in this branch?
>Anyway, as this seems to be a mass of work, I think we should wait
>for the release and switch right after it.
>
>
+1. And let's use the licence by reference, i.e. have the short
boilerplate notice in the source files.
Sylvain
--
Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies
http://www.apache.org/~sylvain http://www.anyware-tech.com
{ XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }
Orixo, the opensource XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com
Re: Switching to licence 2.0?
Posted by Geoff Howard <co...@leverageweb.com>.
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
> Anyway, as this seems to be a mass of work, I think we should wait
> for the release and switch right after it.
+1
Geoff
RE: Switching to licence 2.0?
Posted by Reinhard Poetz <re...@apache.org>.
From: Carsten Ziegeler
> Reinhard Poetz wrote:
> >
> > From: Roy T. Fielding
> >
> > > > Hey licensing@, can we switch to the 2.0 license right now? Are
> > > > the instructions of the wiki correct?
> > >
> > > I have updated them (they were correct, but were a bit too terse).
> > >
> > > I really hate having this kind of thing in a wiki. It should
> > > be under http://www.apache.org/dev/
> > >
> > > Note that antoine has been working on a python script that is
> > > available in the committers/relicense module.
> >
> > --> this seems to be the good news :-)
> >
> > After reading the instructions I think we have more to do
> as expected:
> > "Should the license be included in source files for documentation
> > (e.g. XML that is transformed to HTML)? Yes. All source
> files should
> > include the copyright notice boilerplate that indicates it
> is owned by
> > the ASF and that it is distributed under the Apache
> License, Version
> > 2.0. "
> > --> and this is the bad news as we so have much more work
> as expected
> > :-(
> >
> Yes, this is a lot of work - and we have to do it on all
> branches where we expect new releases, so it might be safer
> to not only change 2.1.x and 2.2.x but also the 2.0.x branch.
>
> Anyway, as this seems to be a mass of work, I think we should
> wait for the release and switch right after it.
>
> WDYT?
+1
--
Reinhard
Re: Switching to licence 2.0?
Posted by Bertrand Delacretaz <bd...@apache.org>.
Le Vendredi, 6 fév 2004, à 09:45 Europe/Zurich, Carsten Ziegeler a
écrit :
> ...Anyway, as this seems to be a mass of work, I think we should wait
> for the release and switch right after it.
>
> WDYT?
+1, let's use the energy to test the release instead.
-Bertrand
RE: Switching to licence 2.0?
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@s-und-n.de>.
Reinhard Poetz wrote:
>
> From: Roy T. Fielding
>
> > > Hey licensing@, can we switch to the 2.0 license right now? Are the
> > > instructions of the wiki correct?
> >
> > I have updated them (they were correct, but were a bit too terse).
> >
> > I really hate having this kind of thing in a wiki. It should
> > be under http://www.apache.org/dev/
> >
> > Note that antoine has been working on a python script that is
> > available in the committers/relicense module.
>
> --> this seems to be the good news :-)
>
> After reading the instructions I think we have more to do as expected:
> "Should the license be included in source files for documentation (e.g.
> XML that is transformed to HTML)?
> Yes. All source files should include the copyright notice boilerplate
> that indicates it is owned by the ASF and that it is distributed under
> the Apache License, Version 2.0. "
> --> and this is the bad news as we so have much more work as expected
> :-(
>
Yes, this is a lot of work - and we have to do it on all branches where
we expect new releases, so it might be safer to not only change 2.1.x
and 2.2.x but also the 2.0.x branch.
Anyway, as this seems to be a mass of work, I think we should wait
for the release and switch right after it.
WDYT?
Carsten
RE: Switching to licence 2.0?
Posted by Reinhard Poetz <re...@apache.org>.
From: Roy T. Fielding
> > Hey licensing@, can we switch to the 2.0 license right now? Are the
> > instructions of the wiki correct?
>
> I have updated them (they were correct, but were a bit too terse).
>
> I really hate having this kind of thing in a wiki. It should
> be under http://www.apache.org/dev/
>
> Note that antoine has been working on a python script that is
> available in the committers/relicense module.
--> this seems to be the good news :-)
After reading the instructions I think we have more to do as expected:
"Should the license be included in source files for documentation (e.g.
XML that is transformed to HTML)?
Yes. All source files should include the copyright notice boilerplate
that indicates it is owned by the ASF and that it is distributed under
the Apache License, Version 2.0. "
--> and this is the bad news as we so have much more work as expected
:-(
--
Reinhard
Re: Switching to licence 2.0?
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@apache.org>.
> Hey licensing@, can we switch to the 2.0 license right now? Are the
> instructions of the wiki correct?
I have updated them (they were correct, but were a bit too terse).
I really hate having this kind of thing in a wiki. It should be
under http://www.apache.org/dev/
Note that antoine has been working on a python script that is
available in the committers/relicense module.
....Roy
Re: Switching to licence 2.0?
Posted by Sylvain Wallez <sy...@apache.org>.
Vadim Gritsenko wrote:
> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>
>> Afaik, the instructions are here on the wiki:
>>
>> http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?License2FAQ
>>
>> Some projects, like Ant for example, have already switched.
>
>
> Well, Greg Stein had clearly said to wait for instructions on committers:
>
>> Please watch this space for further instructions on how to "use" the
>> new license.
>
>
> And I have not seen anything, including link to the wiki above, on all
> those lists: members, committers, pmc, ... That's troubling. Are you
> sure that these are "official" instructions and not something put
> together by Darl? I don't want to change license headers twice.
So let's ask it!
Hey licensing@, can we switch to the 2.0 license right now? Are the
instructions of the wiki correct?
Thanks in advance,
Sylvain
--
Sylvain Wallez Anyware Technologies
http://www.apache.org/~sylvain http://www.anyware-tech.com
{ XML, Java, Cocoon, OpenSource }*{ Training, Consulting, Projects }
Orixo, the opensource XML business alliance - http://www.orixo.com
Re: Switching to licence 2.0?
Posted by Vadim Gritsenko <va...@reverycodes.com>.
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>Afaik, the instructions are here on the wiki:
>
>http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?License2FAQ
>
>Some projects, like Ant for example, have already switched.
>
>
Well, Greg Stein had clearly said to wait for instructions on committers:
>Please watch this space for
> further instructions on how to "use" the new license.
>
And I have not seen anything, including link to the wiki above, on all
those lists: members, committers, pmc, ... That's troubling. Are you
sure that these are "official" instructions and not something put
together by Darl? I don't want to change license headers twice.
Vadim
RE: Switching to licence 2.0?
Posted by Carsten Ziegeler <cz...@s-und-n.de>.
Afaik, the instructions are here on the wiki:
http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?License2FAQ
Some projects, like Ant for example, have already switched.
Carsten
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Vadim Gritsenko [mailto:vadim@reverycodes.com]
> Sent: Thursday, February 05, 2004 2:48 PM
> To: dev@cocoon.apache.org
> Subject: Re: Switching to licence 2.0?
>
>
> Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>
> >What is the general feeling when we should switch to the 2.0 licence?
> >
> >
>
> ASAP. But unfortunately this is not yet possible because instructions
> are not yet out... :-/
> (Unless I missed some of the committers@ emails, which (in theory)
> possible due to recent email chaos)
>
> Vadim
>
>
Re: Switching to licence 2.0?
Posted by Vadim Gritsenko <va...@reverycodes.com>.
Carsten Ziegeler wrote:
>What is the general feeling when we should switch to the 2.0 licence?
>
>
ASAP. But unfortunately this is not yet possible because instructions
are not yet out... :-/
(Unless I missed some of the committers@ emails, which (in theory)
possible due to recent email chaos)
Vadim
RE: Switching to licence 2.0?
Posted by Reinhard Poetz <re...@apache.org>.
From: Carsten Ziegeler
> What is the general feeling when we should switch to the 2.0
> licence? Before our 2.1.4 release or directly after the
> release? We have to do it before 1 March 2004.
>
> For more info, see here:
>
> http://nagoya.apache.org/wiki/apachewiki.cgi?License2FAQ
>
> WDYT?
In order to make the transformation automatically we can write an Ant
task. This shouldn't be too difficult. Any takers with having some time?
;-) I could write it too but I'm not sure if I have enough time before
the release.
--
Reinhard