You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org> on 2008/08/25 17:49:46 UTC
IP Clearance form re INCUBATOR-77
I'm trying to resolve INCUBATOR-77 and I feel stuck on the wording in
the clearance template:
"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."
and
"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."
Per the issue mentioned, there is an LGPL dependency right now that is
going to be resolved. Thus, I am not sure what to do. Can we fill
out this and proceed w/ the checking in the code, knowing that we
can't release it until this is resolved or can I truly not finish
filling out the IP clearance (https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/site-author/ip-clearance/local-lucene-solr.xml
) until it is resolved? Part of me thinks, that if we commit, but not
release, that we will get some user volunteers to take up the issue of
replacing the problematic code. My understanding of the ASF (and
based on Doug C.'s comment) is that we could commit as long as we
don't release, but the clearance template seems to put up a gate that
isn't necessarily there.
Please advise.
Thanks,
Grant
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: IP Clearance form re INCUBATOR-77
Posted by Craig L Russell <Cr...@Sun.COM>.
On Aug 29, 2008, at 12:17 PM, Grant Ingersoll wrote:
>
> On Aug 26, 2008, at 2:59 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>
>> On 8/25/08, Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> I'm trying to resolve INCUBATOR-77 and I feel stuck on the wording
>>> in
>>> the clearance template:
>>> "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."
>>> and
>>> "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."
>>
>> The template's a guide rather than a normative document. The licenses
>> need to be audited and checked against current Apache policy (rather
>> than the examplars given).
>>
>>> Per the issue mentioned, there is an LGPL dependency right now
>>> that is
>>> going to be resolved. Thus, I am not sure what to do. Can we fill
>>> out this and proceed w/ the checking in the code, knowing that we
>>> can't release it until this is resolved or can I truly not finish
>>> filling out the IP clearance
>>> (https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/site-author/ip-clearance/local-lucene-solr.xml
>>> ) until it is resolved? Part of me thinks, that if we commit, but
>>> not
>>> release, that we will get some user volunteers to take up the
>>> issue of
>>> replacing the problematic code. My understanding of the ASF (and
>>> based on Doug C.'s comment) is that we could commit as long as we
>>> don't release, but the clearance template seems to put up a gate
>>> that
>>> isn't neccessarily there
>>
>> IMHO the template is wrong and conflates concerns which are better
>> separated. Separation into a guide and a simple form would be much
>> better.
>
>
> I think what you are saying, then, is that I can go forward and mark
> that the code in question will be removed before being released?
That's what I would suggest. Note the issue in the ip clearance form,
and check in the code. There's a flag that the code can't be released
with the LGPL components included but that's part of the release
process, not the entrance process.
Craig
>
>
> -Grant
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
Craig L Russell
Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo
408 276-5638 mailto:Craig.Russell@sun.com
P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
Re: IP Clearance form re INCUBATOR-77
Posted by Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org>.
On Aug 26, 2008, at 2:59 AM, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> On 8/25/08, Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org> wrote:
>> I'm trying to resolve INCUBATOR-77 and I feel stuck on the wording in
>> the clearance template:
>> "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."
>> and
>> "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."
>
> The template's a guide rather than a normative document. The licenses
> need to be audited and checked against current Apache policy (rather
> than the examplars given).
>
>> Per the issue mentioned, there is an LGPL dependency right now that
>> is
>> going to be resolved. Thus, I am not sure what to do. Can we fill
>> out this and proceed w/ the checking in the code, knowing that we
>> can't release it until this is resolved or can I truly not finish
>> filling out the IP clearance
>> (https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/site-author/ip-clearance/local-lucene-solr.xml
>> ) until it is resolved? Part of me thinks, that if we commit, but
>> not
>> release, that we will get some user volunteers to take up the issue
>> of
>> replacing the problematic code. My understanding of the ASF (and
>> based on Doug C.'s comment) is that we could commit as long as we
>> don't release, but the clearance template seems to put up a gate that
>> isn't neccessarily there
>
> IMHO the template is wrong and conflates concerns which are better
> separated. Separation into a guide and a simple form would be much
> better.
I think what you are saying, then, is that I can go forward and mark
that the code in question will be removed before being released?
-Grant
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: IP Clearance form re INCUBATOR-77
Posted by Robert Burrell Donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On 8/25/08, Grant Ingersoll <gs...@apache.org> wrote:
> I'm trying to resolve INCUBATOR-77 and I feel stuck on the wording in
> the clearance template:
> "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."
> and
> "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."
The template's a guide rather than a normative document. The licenses
need to be audited and checked against current Apache policy (rather
than the examplars given).
> Per the issue mentioned, there is an LGPL dependency right now that is
> going to be resolved. Thus, I am not sure what to do. Can we fill
> out this and proceed w/ the checking in the code, knowing that we
> can't release it until this is resolved or can I truly not finish
> filling out the IP clearance
> (https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/site-author/ip-clearance/local-lucene-solr.xml
> ) until it is resolved? Part of me thinks, that if we commit, but not
> release, that we will get some user volunteers to take up the issue of
> replacing the problematic code. My understanding of the ASF (and
> based on Doug C.'s comment) is that we could commit as long as we
> don't release, but the clearance template seems to put up a gate that
> isn't neccessarily there
IMHO the template is wrong and conflates concerns which are better
separated. Separation into a guide and a simple form would be much
better.
Robert
>
> Please advise.
>
> Thanks,
> Grant
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org