Cantor, Scott <canto...@osu.edu> writes: > No concerns with git, if that's something Apache allows as the > "official" repo now [...]
I would sure hope so. > 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. Yes, it will be purely additive and I am committing to maintaining it. > FWIW, GitHub's terms of use are impossible for me to accept for > any active development work due to their indemnification clause. I used GitHub as an example. I am happy with any similar service (e.g., GitLab). > 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. Well, my motivation for forking would be to continue maintaining the project for general use but with less "friction". I also think you are over-burdening yourself with responsibility: yes, security issues are bad news but in the end the license clearly states that things come as-is and without any warranty. > But fundamentally, the issue is viability. We have a product (CodeSynthesis XSD) that depends on it so we are planning to use and maintain it going forward. At the same time we view it as a mature (if not legacy) codebase so we have no plans to add any new features, etc. I am, however, not sure whether Apache is interested in a project like this. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: c-dev-unsubscr...@xerces.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: c-dev-h...@xerces.apache.org
