You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@flex.apache.org by Gautam Pandey <gk...@gmail.com> on 2014/10/15 14:09:55 UTC
Re: AW: AW: Donation of Flexmojos
Is there any progress in donating flexmojos to Apache? I am stuck because
of GPL and I cannot go forward and use 6.0.1 as my company is not allowing
to use GPL licensed software.
Thanks & Regards
Gautam Pandey
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 1/25/13 7:12 AM, "Greg Reddin" <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 3:35 AM, christofer.dutz@c-ware.de <
> > christofer.dutz@c-ware.de> wrote:
> >
> >> So ... does this have any impact on the plans to donate? Is it now
> harder
> >> to donate or does it make stuff even easier?
> >>
> >
> > To my knowledge the current licensing strategy of the product has no
> > bearing on its donation. My assumption is that, by donating it, Velo
> > asserts that he has intellectual property rights to the software, and
> he's
> > passing those rights on to Apache. Apache can then relicense the software
> > if/when we get ready to release it.
> But I would say it means that a donation is now required. My idea of
> having
> you just borrow code from its current repository is now void because you
> cannot borrow GPL code.
>
> Also, there could be some trickiness in that Velo has to be certain that he
> has the right to re-license the code as Apache license. Whether he does
> that before or after donation may not matter, but effectively, it is being
> re-licensed. I don't know the GPL terms and what contributor agreement he
> had, but that might dictate whether he has the authority to re-license.
>
> Finally, do we really have to have this code? How many of us committers
> will actually make changes to and release from this code base? If it just
> Chris, then I would argue we don't really have a community around it. I am
> not motivated to work on what has been described as a old monolithic beast,
> but I would be more willing to help out with the new code for the Apache
> Flex releases.
>
> So, the way I see it, Velo has to re-license to Apache one way or another
> or
> we have to find a way not to copy significant portions of that code.
>
> --
> Alex Harui
> Flex SDK Team
> Adobe Systems, Inc.
> http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
>
>
AW: AW: AW: Donation of Flexmojos
Posted by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>.
The plugin skeleton is already there ... in flex-utils.
I guess starting on the main mojos "compile" would be best. But I think I would need to start this as it's a pretty tricky thing and I would let a lot of inspiration flow from flexmojos into it. As soon as the compile mojo is done, there are about 10-15 differnt little helpers needed (Test Source Prepare, Test-Runner, Flash Sandbox Registration, ...)
Unfortunately I'm currently working on getting the one plugin we have (Flexmojos) running with falcon ... as soon as that's done I would like to have FlexPMD and BLazeDS out of the door. Perhaps then I could do the Falcon Antlr4 + JBurg2 update ... then I was planning on working on the plugin (After all ... we currently do have a working solution)
Chris
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Gautam Pandey [mailto:gkptechi@gmail.com]
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 16. Oktober 2014 04:05
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: AW: AW: Donation of Flexmojos
Hi Chris,
Let me know if I can help in creating new plugin. I can give minimum 2 hours daily for this.
Thanks
Gautam
Thanks & Regards
Gautam Pandey
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 10:34 PM, Christofer Dutz <christofer.dutz@c-ware.de
> wrote:
> We had discussed possibilities of how this could be achieved.
> Unfortunately Velo never requested users to officially sign an ICLA.
> So they are still in possetion of the rights to that code. In order to
> donate this, they would all have to agree. This is an enormous amount
> of people I would have to ask. So we dropped this idea. We were
> thinking about creating a new plugin here at apache. Unfortunately I
> have so much stuff to do here that I can't find any time to work on that ... the skeleton is there though.
>
> But the GPL of Flexmojos shouldn't have any influence on what you
> build with Flexmojos. As far as I know, it would only be problematic,
> if you bundled Flexmojos itself with your product.
>
> Chris
>
>
> ________________________________________
> Von: Gautam Pandey <gk...@gmail.com>
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 15. Oktober 2014 14:09
> An: dev@flex.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: AW: AW: Donation of Flexmojos
>
> Is there any progress in donating flexmojos to Apache? I am stuck
> because of GPL and I cannot go forward and use 6.0.1 as my company is
> not allowing to use GPL licensed software.
>
> Thanks & Regards
> Gautam Pandey
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > On 1/25/13 7:12 AM, "Greg Reddin" <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 3:35 AM, christofer.dutz@c-ware.de <
> > > christofer.dutz@c-ware.de> wrote:
> > >
> > >> So ... does this have any impact on the plans to donate? Is it
> > >> now
> > harder
> > >> to donate or does it make stuff even easier?
> > >>
> > >
> > > To my knowledge the current licensing strategy of the product has
> > > no bearing on its donation. My assumption is that, by donating it,
> > > Velo asserts that he has intellectual property rights to the
> > > software, and
> > he's
> > > passing those rights on to Apache. Apache can then relicense the
> software
> > > if/when we get ready to release it.
> > But I would say it means that a donation is now required. My idea
> > of having you just borrow code from its current repository is now
> > void because you cannot borrow GPL code.
> >
> > Also, there could be some trickiness in that Velo has to be certain
> > that
> he
> > has the right to re-license the code as Apache license. Whether he
> > does that before or after donation may not matter, but effectively,
> > it is
> being
> > re-licensed. I don't know the GPL terms and what contributor
> > agreement
> he
> > had, but that might dictate whether he has the authority to re-license.
> >
> > Finally, do we really have to have this code? How many of us
> > committers will actually make changes to and release from this code
> > base? If it
> just
> > Chris, then I would argue we don't really have a community around
> > it. I
> am
> > not motivated to work on what has been described as a old monolithic
> beast,
> > but I would be more willing to help out with the new code for the
> > Apache Flex releases.
> >
> > So, the way I see it, Velo has to re-license to Apache one way or
> > another or we have to find a way not to copy significant portions of
> > that code.
> >
> > --
> > Alex Harui
> > Flex SDK Team
> > Adobe Systems, Inc.
> > http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
> >
> >
>
Re: AW: AW: Donation of Flexmojos
Posted by Gautam Pandey <gk...@gmail.com>.
Hi Chris,
Let me know if I can help in creating new plugin. I can give minimum 2
hours daily for this.
Thanks
Gautam
Thanks & Regards
Gautam Pandey
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 10:34 PM, Christofer Dutz <christofer.dutz@c-ware.de
> wrote:
> We had discussed possibilities of how this could be achieved.
> Unfortunately Velo never requested users to officially sign an ICLA. So
> they are still in possetion of the rights to that code. In order to donate
> this, they would all have to agree. This is an enormous amount of people I
> would have to ask. So we dropped this idea. We were thinking about creating
> a new plugin here at apache. Unfortunately I have so much stuff to do here
> that I can't find any time to work on that ... the skeleton is there though.
>
> But the GPL of Flexmojos shouldn't have any influence on what you build
> with Flexmojos. As far as I know, it would only be problematic, if you
> bundled Flexmojos itself with your product.
>
> Chris
>
>
> ________________________________________
> Von: Gautam Pandey <gk...@gmail.com>
> Gesendet: Mittwoch, 15. Oktober 2014 14:09
> An: dev@flex.apache.org
> Betreff: Re: AW: AW: Donation of Flexmojos
>
> Is there any progress in donating flexmojos to Apache? I am stuck because
> of GPL and I cannot go forward and use 6.0.1 as my company is not allowing
> to use GPL licensed software.
>
> Thanks & Regards
> Gautam Pandey
>
>
> On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> >
> > On 1/25/13 7:12 AM, "Greg Reddin" <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 3:35 AM, christofer.dutz@c-ware.de <
> > > christofer.dutz@c-ware.de> wrote:
> > >
> > >> So ... does this have any impact on the plans to donate? Is it now
> > harder
> > >> to donate or does it make stuff even easier?
> > >>
> > >
> > > To my knowledge the current licensing strategy of the product has no
> > > bearing on its donation. My assumption is that, by donating it, Velo
> > > asserts that he has intellectual property rights to the software, and
> > he's
> > > passing those rights on to Apache. Apache can then relicense the
> software
> > > if/when we get ready to release it.
> > But I would say it means that a donation is now required. My idea of
> > having
> > you just borrow code from its current repository is now void because you
> > cannot borrow GPL code.
> >
> > Also, there could be some trickiness in that Velo has to be certain that
> he
> > has the right to re-license the code as Apache license. Whether he does
> > that before or after donation may not matter, but effectively, it is
> being
> > re-licensed. I don't know the GPL terms and what contributor agreement
> he
> > had, but that might dictate whether he has the authority to re-license.
> >
> > Finally, do we really have to have this code? How many of us committers
> > will actually make changes to and release from this code base? If it
> just
> > Chris, then I would argue we don't really have a community around it. I
> am
> > not motivated to work on what has been described as a old monolithic
> beast,
> > but I would be more willing to help out with the new code for the Apache
> > Flex releases.
> >
> > So, the way I see it, Velo has to re-license to Apache one way or another
> > or
> > we have to find a way not to copy significant portions of that code.
> >
> > --
> > Alex Harui
> > Flex SDK Team
> > Adobe Systems, Inc.
> > http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
> >
> >
>
AW: AW: AW: Donation of Flexmojos
Posted by Christofer Dutz <ch...@c-ware.de>.
We had discussed possibilities of how this could be achieved. Unfortunately Velo never requested users to officially sign an ICLA. So they are still in possetion of the rights to that code. In order to donate this, they would all have to agree. This is an enormous amount of people I would have to ask. So we dropped this idea. We were thinking about creating a new plugin here at apache. Unfortunately I have so much stuff to do here that I can't find any time to work on that ... the skeleton is there though.
But the GPL of Flexmojos shouldn't have any influence on what you build with Flexmojos. As far as I know, it would only be problematic, if you bundled Flexmojos itself with your product.
Chris
________________________________________
Von: Gautam Pandey <gk...@gmail.com>
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 15. Oktober 2014 14:09
An: dev@flex.apache.org
Betreff: Re: AW: AW: Donation of Flexmojos
Is there any progress in donating flexmojos to Apache? I am stuck because
of GPL and I cannot go forward and use 6.0.1 as my company is not allowing
to use GPL licensed software.
Thanks & Regards
Gautam Pandey
On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 9:36 PM, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> On 1/25/13 7:12 AM, "Greg Reddin" <gr...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jan 25, 2013 at 3:35 AM, christofer.dutz@c-ware.de <
> > christofer.dutz@c-ware.de> wrote:
> >
> >> So ... does this have any impact on the plans to donate? Is it now
> harder
> >> to donate or does it make stuff even easier?
> >>
> >
> > To my knowledge the current licensing strategy of the product has no
> > bearing on its donation. My assumption is that, by donating it, Velo
> > asserts that he has intellectual property rights to the software, and
> he's
> > passing those rights on to Apache. Apache can then relicense the software
> > if/when we get ready to release it.
> But I would say it means that a donation is now required. My idea of
> having
> you just borrow code from its current repository is now void because you
> cannot borrow GPL code.
>
> Also, there could be some trickiness in that Velo has to be certain that he
> has the right to re-license the code as Apache license. Whether he does
> that before or after donation may not matter, but effectively, it is being
> re-licensed. I don't know the GPL terms and what contributor agreement he
> had, but that might dictate whether he has the authority to re-license.
>
> Finally, do we really have to have this code? How many of us committers
> will actually make changes to and release from this code base? If it just
> Chris, then I would argue we don't really have a community around it. I am
> not motivated to work on what has been described as a old monolithic beast,
> but I would be more willing to help out with the new code for the Apache
> Flex releases.
>
> So, the way I see it, Velo has to re-license to Apache one way or another
> or
> we have to find a way not to copy significant portions of that code.
>
> --
> Alex Harui
> Flex SDK Team
> Adobe Systems, Inc.
> http://blogs.adobe.com/aharui
>
>