Hi Craig,
On Jul 17, 2006, at 11:06 PM, Craig L Russell wrote:
Congratulations on your successful 1.2 release.
Thanks!
I guess now we need to start getting into the Apache release
procedure. The docs [1] are still work in progress, so an advice
from our mentors is very much appreciated.
Docs are not a reason to wait for release. In some sense, most docs
are in a state of "almost there". The readiness of docs is quite
subjective, unlike other aspects of incubation.
Actually by "docs" I meant the Incubator guidelines outlining the
expectations like where to put the LICENSE file, how to do a vote,
and such (not the Cayenne docs).
I'll do some research on my own as well (probably just look at
other incubating projects). If I understand correctly, with all
the proper disclaimers we can make a 2.0 release from the
incubator before the CLA situation is addressed 100% (it is now at
~80%),
I don't believe that the incubator will authorize a release prior
to the IP issues being resolved. I've never seen a release approved
with this kind of pending IP issue. But I haven't been tracking all
your IP issues. My advice is not to ask to release prior to
cleaning up all IP.
There is no IP *issues* per se, as Cayenne was developed from the
beginning with a compatible open source license. It basically comes
down to recording remaining CLA's that were already sent. And making
a decision on how to handle a few classes that we can't track (which,
considering the original open source license, we should find a way to
deal with).
http://tinyurl.com/gr998
and before Windows build LGPL dependency [2] is resolved?
I think the JIRA has is correct. You cannot distribute any LGPL
code from Apache, so you would have to have the user download,
install, and link the launcher with your executable. It doesn't
sound like your "binary" distribution can easily use this
technique, though. So you would need either an alternative
technology or a distribution of code and a process to link the
pieces together. Good luck (I'm not familiar with the technology
enough to help you here).
I think Roller released with LGPL dependencies, so there is a
precedent. But I am with you on the general idea that we shouldn't
rush it until it is ready. In practical terms it means we will need
to branch 2.0 (our "ObjectStyle -> Apache migration helper release"),
and continue developing 3.0 on HEAD, while we resolve all the things
above.
And while we are working on getting the CLA's in, I wanted to
understand and address other requirements, as I mentioned above.
Andrus
