On 3/23/19, 11:30 AM, "Boris Kolpackov" <bo...@codesynthesis.com> wrote:
> I would like to put these two points to a vote but before doing so > I thought I would check what the sentiment is. No concerns with git, if that's something Apache allows as the "official" repo now (subject to it actually being an Apache project, obviously). My only concern with the build system is that I need the autoconf support so as long as that's not going anywhere, anything else is up to the people offering to maintain it. I can't see anything happening any time soon that would be so disruptive to the code as to break that support. > Finally, seeing that we are on the topic of migration and switching, > the question of the overall viability as the Apache project has come > up recently and some mentioned that they have considered forking the > project and hosting the fork in a less "structured" setting (e.g., > GitHub). FWIW, GitHub's terms of use are impossible for me to accept for any active development work due to their indemnification clause. I literally work on a project that IBM tried to sue over IPR rights once, so it's not a theoretical consideration for me. If I were to fork, it would only be in the interest of ensuring that nobody else used the code under the impression it were being maintained for general use, and to ensure that the library naming wouldn't conflict with any other packaging. Red Hat, for example, packaged 3.1 on RHEL7 but then never bothered to maintain it or apply security fixes, which screwed over my project nicely. Getting 3.2 out allowed me to avoid that soname conflict, but I do fear them (or others with similar lack of diligence) repeating that again with 3.2, so it's a race to stay ahead of it right now. But fundamentally, the issue is viability. If people think the project is viable (which to me means security issues across the code base are actually going to get dealt with promptly), then venue is really a political and process conversation more than anything. But if it's not, I think encouraging people to fork and rename it is a responsible choice. -- Scott
