You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@attic.apache.org by Johan Lindquist <jo...@kawoo.co.uk> on 2009/04/22 22:31:21 UTC
Hivemind fork
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
With the move of Hivemind to the Attic we were now hoping to continue
the development with a fork over at OPS4J. When the Hivemind PMC voted
for the move, it was our understanding that the intent was to allow for
work to continue, if not with Apache, but also elsewhere.
Now, we were wondering if there is anything in particular we should or
need to think of/consider for this?
Thanks in advance,
Johan
- --
you too?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFJ736ZpHYnED7evioRAoylAJ936JRoLNRUy+a1KLq5KLrHXRNgxQCfQXdM
8ZKlZEL2E7hTM+a3tgazLk0=
=YMMq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Re: Hivemind fork
Posted by Henri Yandell <hy...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 12:30 AM, Raffael Herzog <he...@raffael.ch> wrote:
> Am Montag, 27. April 2009 08.05:25 schrieb Henning Schmiedehausen:
>> I pretty much agree with Mads. Attic should not take any active role in
>> modifying the code base before anyone takes it off-Apache. The whole
>> point of Attic is *not* doing this. :-)
>
> Well, maybe we moved on a bit too progressively, but actually, the code has
> already been taken off-Apache and some work has already been done:
>
> https://scm.ops4j.org/repos/ops4j/laboratory/hivemind/
<snip>
> - We just leave it forever?
Might as well. Copyright statements in source is extremely common, so
it's not as if you'll have anything odd about having to keep the
copyright statements in the source files. At this point in your
community it would probably be more damaging to pause things and
restart.
Hen
Re: Hivemind fork
Posted by Raffael Herzog <he...@raffael.ch>.
Am Montag, 27. April 2009 08.05:25 schrieb Henning Schmiedehausen:
> I pretty much agree with Mads. Attic should not take any active role in
> modifying the code base before anyone takes it off-Apache. The whole
> point of Attic is *not* doing this. :-)
Well, maybe we moved on a bit too progressively, but actually, the code has
already been taken off-Apache and some work has already been done:
https://scm.ops4j.org/repos/ops4j/laboratory/hivemind/
For explanation:
- hivemind1 is a copy of the HiveMind 1 trunk
- hivemind2 is a copy of the HiveMind 2 trunk
- devel is a branch of HiveMind 1, where we made our first changes
The two copies from Apache's source repository are completely unmodified,
except the inconsistent newlines in the XML files.
The plan is to release ASAP what would have been HiveMind 1.2 under a new
name. Based on this, we'd like to provide support and maintenance, i.e.
there won't be any new features, bug fixes only.
After that, we're going to start development of a NextGen HiveMind based on
hivemind2.
So, what's the proposal?
- Someone from Apache changes it in the OPS4J repository?
- Apache changes it at Apache and we merge the changes?
- Apache changes it at Apache and we start over?
- We just leave it forever?
It seems a bit unfortunate, that something like this happens with the first
project being moved to the Attic, then again, that's part of the learning
process of how to do that, I guess ... ;)
Cheers,
Raffi
--
The difference between theory and practice is that in theory, there is
no difference, but in practice, there is.
herzog@raffael.ch · Jabber: herzog@raffael.ch
PGP Key 0x5FFDB5DB5D1FF5F4 · http://keyserver.pgp.com
Re: Hivemind fork
Posted by Henning Schmiedehausen <hp...@intermeta.de>.
I pretty much agree with Mads. Attic should not take any active role in
modifying the code base before anyone takes it off-Apache. The whole point
of Attic is *not* doing this. :-)
So, I would be -0 on it, too.
Ciao
Henning
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 22:59, Mads Toftum <ma...@toftum.dk> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 08:49:10PM -0700, Henri Yandell wrote:
> > They can't be removed, except by the copyright holder.
> >
> > However - it's not normal Apache practice to keep them in there. There
> > was a move to update src headers a few years back and it looks like it
> > missed HiveMind.
> >
> > I'll update the files in hivemind2/trunk [I'm assuming you're taking
> > things from trunk and that the desired version is hivemind2].
> >
> I'm a bit uncomfortable breaking the rules of attic on the first project
> going in. The copyright cleaning may have been missed by the project or
> it may have been intentional. Either way, I don't think it's the
> business of attic to change it even if it is convenient for some outside
> group. I suppose that makes me -0 on the change.
>
> vh
>
> Mads Toftum
> --
> http://soulfood.dk
>
Re: Hivemind fork
Posted by Mads Toftum <ma...@toftum.dk>.
On Sun, Apr 26, 2009 at 08:49:10PM -0700, Henri Yandell wrote:
> They can't be removed, except by the copyright holder.
>
> However - it's not normal Apache practice to keep them in there. There
> was a move to update src headers a few years back and it looks like it
> missed HiveMind.
>
> I'll update the files in hivemind2/trunk [I'm assuming you're taking
> things from trunk and that the desired version is hivemind2].
>
I'm a bit uncomfortable breaking the rules of attic on the first project
going in. The copyright cleaning may have been missed by the project or
it may have been intentional. Either way, I don't think it's the
business of attic to change it even if it is convenient for some outside
group. I suppose that makes me -0 on the change.
vh
Mads Toftum
--
http://soulfood.dk
Re: Hivemind fork
Posted by Henri Yandell <hy...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Apr 27, 2009 at 9:17 AM, Craig L Russell <Cr...@sun.com> wrote:
>
> On Apr 26, 2009, at 8:49 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>
>> On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 11:58 PM, Johan Lindquist <jo...@kawoo.co.uk>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Notice file would be left intact - there are copyrights as part of the
>>> headers in the files - would these remain or can they safely be
>>> removed/changed in the derived work?
>>
>> They can't be removed, except by the copyright holder.
>>
>> However - it's not normal Apache practice to keep them in there. There
>> was a move to update src headers a few years back and it looks like it
>> missed HiveMind.
>>
>> I'll update the files in hivemind2/trunk [I'm assuming you're taking
>> things from trunk and that the desired version is hivemind2].
>>
>> Let me know otherwise [I'll aim to do it tomorrow night so you've time
>> to point me in the right direction].
>>
>> Attic PMC - feel free to -1 if you think this is bad. It's the
>> application of a standard Apache style, so I think it's harmless
>> enough and will simplify things for the fork.
>
> I agree with Mads and Henning that the attic is *not* the place for this
> kind of cleanup. Copyright notices and licenses should be removed only by
> the copyright holders (in conjunction with updating the NOTICE if
> appropriate).
>
> So I'm -1 on changing the copyright notices on attic artifacts.
We are the copyright holder.
Anyway - consensus definitely against this so I won't do it.
Hen
Re: Hivemind fork
Posted by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>.
On Apr 26, 2009, at 8:49 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 11:58 PM, Johan Lindquist
> <jo...@kawoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>> Notice file would be left intact - there are copyrights as part of
>> the
>> headers in the files - would these remain or can they safely be
>> removed/changed in the derived work?
>
> They can't be removed, except by the copyright holder.
>
> However - it's not normal Apache practice to keep them in there. There
> was a move to update src headers a few years back and it looks like it
> missed HiveMind.
>
> I'll update the files in hivemind2/trunk [I'm assuming you're taking
> things from trunk and that the desired version is hivemind2].
>
> Let me know otherwise [I'll aim to do it tomorrow night so you've time
> to point me in the right direction].
>
> Attic PMC - feel free to -1 if you think this is bad. It's the
> application of a standard Apache style, so I think it's harmless
> enough and will simplify things for the fork.
I agree with Mads and Henning that the attic is *not* the place for
this kind of cleanup. Copyright notices and licenses should be removed
only by the copyright holders (in conjunction with updating the NOTICE
if appropriate).
So I'm -1 on changing the copyright notices on attic artifacts.
Craig
>
>
> Hen
Craig L Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Re: Hivemind fork
Posted by Henri Yandell <hy...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Apr 22, 2009 at 11:58 PM, Johan Lindquist <jo...@kawoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Notice file would be left intact - there are copyrights as part of the
> headers in the files - would these remain or can they safely be
> removed/changed in the derived work?
They can't be removed, except by the copyright holder.
However - it's not normal Apache practice to keep them in there. There
was a move to update src headers a few years back and it looks like it
missed HiveMind.
I'll update the files in hivemind2/trunk [I'm assuming you're taking
things from trunk and that the desired version is hivemind2].
Let me know otherwise [I'll aim to do it tomorrow night so you've time
to point me in the right direction].
Attic PMC - feel free to -1 if you think this is bad. It's the
application of a standard Apache style, so I think it's harmless
enough and will simplify things for the fork.
Hen
Re: Hivemind fork
Posted by Johan Lindquist <jo...@kawoo.co.uk>.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hi Craig,
Craig L Russell wrote:
> Hi Johan,
>
> On Apr 22, 2009, at 1:31 PM, Johan Lindquist wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> With the move of Hivemind to the Attic we were now hoping to
> continue the development with a fork over at OPS4J. When the
> Hivemind PMC voted for the move, it was our understanding that the
> intent was to allow for work to continue, if not with Apache, but
> also elsewhere.
>
>> Right. Forks are *not* discouraged.
>
Great :)
>
> Now, we were wondering if there is anything in particular we should
> or need to think of/consider for this?
>
>> 1. The Apache license is very liberal, but it does have an
>> attribution requirement. So don't overlook the NOTICE.
>
Notice file would be left intact - there are copyrights as part of the
headers in the files - would these remain or can they safely be
removed/changed in the derived work?
>> 2. Don't call the new project by a name that might confuse
>> people.
>
It will indeed get a new (so far undecided) name - will let the list
know when it has been decided.
>> Good luck,
>
Thanks!
>> Craig
>
>
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Johan
>
> Craig L Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System
> http://db.apache.org/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
> P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
- --
you too?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQFJ8BGLpHYnED7evioRAqf3AJ977Z3CYW86EOqp5562A/UaC41n/wCgnoQf
futg1ZbCsmwc+BMLSxdkpC8=
=x3vS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Re: Hivemind fork
Posted by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>.
Hi Johan,
On Apr 22, 2009, at 1:31 PM, Johan Lindquist wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi,
>
> With the move of Hivemind to the Attic we were now hoping to continue
> the development with a fork over at OPS4J. When the Hivemind PMC
> voted
> for the move, it was our understanding that the intent was to allow
> for
> work to continue, if not with Apache, but also elsewhere.
Right. Forks are *not* discouraged.
>
>
> Now, we were wondering if there is anything in particular we should or
> need to think of/consider for this?
1. The Apache license is very liberal, but it does have an attribution
requirement. So don't overlook the NOTICE.
2. Don't call the new project by a name that might confuse people.
Good luck,
Craig
>
>
> Thanks in advance,
>
> Johan
>
> - --
> you too?
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
>
> iD8DBQFJ736ZpHYnED7evioRAoylAJ936JRoLNRUy+a1KLq5KLrHXRNgxQCfQXdM
> 8ZKlZEL2E7hTM+a3tgazLk0=
> =YMMq
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Craig L Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://db.apache.org/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!