You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@openoffice.apache.org by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> on 2013/03/05 19:20:15 UTC
Re: New page: Contributing Code
On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
> On 13/02/2013 Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>> For example, I've seen it written that to
>> contribute to AOO means that you must transfer ownership of the code
>> to teh ASF. Of course, this is not true. You retain the ownership
>
>
> I added a sentence about this to
> http://openoffice.apache.org/contributing-code.html
> since this is a common misconception indeed. The rest of the page is really
> informative, it deserves publicity!
>
Thanks. I'm hoping it does just that -- clear up any confusion.
However, it is hard to be both concise and accurate. As we know the
ASF policy in this area is nuanced, and a contribution is more the
start of a process than a single instant event.
For example, the page currently says, "The code must be under the
Apache License 2.0. Any dependencies must also be under that license
or a similar permissive license."
This is a fair piece of advise, but we know that the truth is far more
complicated. There can be some non-permissive dependencies, in binary
form, with some licenses, for example. But if we had to explain it
completely the page would unnecessarily duplicate what already exists
elsewhere on apache.org. And unfortunately what already exists is
inscrutable to the typical reader of that page.
But I did recently think about an alternative way of expressing the
requirement, which might show the flexibility inherent in the process.
Instead of talking directly about the license, we could say something
like this:
"-- The code must be contributed by or with permission of the original
author(s) of the code. Dependencies on 3rd party libraries should be
discussed on the dev list, to see how these can be brought into
conformance with ASF policy."
Regards,
-Rob
> Regards,
> Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: New page: Contributing Code
Posted by Daniel Shahaf <da...@apache.org>.
Andrea Pescetti wrote on Wed, Mar 06, 2013 at 10:01:03 +0100:
> Rob Weir wrote:
>> OK. Feel free to update the language. I think we agree on the facts.
>> It is just a matter of making it clear.
>
> Done at http://openoffice.apache.org/contributing-code.html (first
> bullet item). Feel free to review/modify again if further clarifications
> are needed.
>
+1, looks good to me.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: New page: Contributing Code
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Rob Weir wrote:
> OK. Feel free to update the language. I think we agree on the facts.
> It is just a matter of making it clear.
Done at http://openoffice.apache.org/contributing-code.html (first
bullet item). Feel free to review/modify again if further clarifications
are needed.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: New page: Contributing Code
Posted by Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org>.
On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 3:57 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org> wrote:
> Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>> For example, the page currently says, "The code must be under the
>> Apache License 2.0. Any dependencies must also be under that license
>> or a similar permissive license."
>> This is a fair piece of advise, but we know that the truth is far more
>> complicated.
>
>
> Yes, and I agree that this complexity is already documented in the Apache
> policy and needn't be explained here: here we are presenting contributions
> from the developer's point of view; the project's point of view (i.e., how
> to use contributions effectively) may be more complex and involve coding
> standards and other best practices, but this is a further step.
>
>
>> Instead of talking directly about the license, we could say something
>> like this:
>> "-- The code must be contributed by or with permission of the original
>> author(s) of the code. Dependencies on 3rd party libraries should be
>> discussed on the dev list, to see how these can be brought into
>> conformance with ASF policy."
>
>
> I think it's fine to still mention that the contributed code must be under
> ALv2 or compatible licensing terms: this is a prerequisite. But I like the
> more flexible phrasing about dependencies.
>
> The solver is a good example: OpenOffice already had the solver, but it was
> relying on incompatible libraries; and the project didn't rewrite the
> solver, it merely modified it to work with compatible libraries. A similar
> scenario would be considered if we receive some outstanding contribution
> having incompatible dependencies, so it's good to rectify this.
>
OK. Feel free to update the language. I think we agree on the facts.
It is just a matter of making it clear.
-Rob
>
> Regards,
> Andrea.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: New page: Contributing Code
Posted by Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>.
Rob Weir wrote:
> For example, the page currently says, "The code must be under the
> Apache License 2.0. Any dependencies must also be under that license
> or a similar permissive license."
> This is a fair piece of advise, but we know that the truth is far more
> complicated.
Yes, and I agree that this complexity is already documented in the
Apache policy and needn't be explained here: here we are presenting
contributions from the developer's point of view; the project's point of
view (i.e., how to use contributions effectively) may be more complex
and involve coding standards and other best practices, but this is a
further step.
> Instead of talking directly about the license, we could say something
> like this:
> "-- The code must be contributed by or with permission of the original
> author(s) of the code. Dependencies on 3rd party libraries should be
> discussed on the dev list, to see how these can be brought into
> conformance with ASF policy."
I think it's fine to still mention that the contributed code must be
under ALv2 or compatible licensing terms: this is a prerequisite. But I
like the more flexible phrasing about dependencies.
The solver is a good example: OpenOffice already had the solver, but it
was relying on incompatible libraries; and the project didn't rewrite
the solver, it merely modified it to work with compatible libraries. A
similar scenario would be considered if we receive some outstanding
contribution having incompatible dependencies, so it's good to rectify this.
Regards,
Andrea.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
Re: New page: Contributing Code
Posted by janI <ja...@apache.org>.
On 5 March 2013 19:20, Rob Weir <ro...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 16, 2013 at 6:08 PM, Andrea Pescetti <pe...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > On 13/02/2013 Rob Weir wrote:
> >>
> >> For example, I've seen it written that to
> >> contribute to AOO means that you must transfer ownership of the code
> >> to teh ASF. Of course, this is not true. You retain the ownership
> >
> >
> > I added a sentence about this to
> > http://openoffice.apache.org/contributing-code.html
> > since this is a common misconception indeed. The rest of the page is
> really
> > informative, it deserves publicity!
> >
>
> Thanks. I'm hoping it does just that -- clear up any confusion.
>
> However, it is hard to be both concise and accurate. As we know the
> ASF policy in this area is nuanced, and a contribution is more the
> start of a process than a single instant event.
>
> For example, the page currently says, "The code must be under the
> Apache License 2.0. Any dependencies must also be under that license
> or a similar permissive license."
>
> This is a fair piece of advise, but we know that the truth is far more
> complicated. There can be some non-permissive dependencies, in binary
> form, with some licenses, for example. But if we had to explain it
> completely the page would unnecessarily duplicate what already exists
> elsewhere on apache.org. And unfortunately what already exists is
> inscrutable to the typical reader of that page.
>
> But I did recently think about an alternative way of expressing the
> requirement, which might show the flexibility inherent in the process.
> Instead of talking directly about the license, we could say something
> like this:
>
> "-- The code must be contributed by or with permission of the original
> author(s) of the code. Dependencies on 3rd party libraries should be
> discussed on the dev list, to see how these can be brought into
> conformance with ASF policy."
>
+1 that is a very clear formulation. I should I assume read libraries/tools.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
> > Regards,
> > Andrea.
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org
>
>