<snip/>
not used (which could also be "used - but no given feedback since it works") doesn't necessarily mean non-healthy, don't you think?> If we announce SAP support for Cocoon I bet people will be using it. > Using brings complains, bugfixes and finally maintainance. IMHO this > is no big problem.If I cannot test it myself, I would be very suspicious of having it in our repository. > If people really don't use it - it's just another component in our CVS. > ...like maybe others that are rarely used;) Which is also a problem IMHO. Making them into "blocks" helps in not making Cocoon tied to non-healthy components.
Sorry for not being precise - I was aware of that...> So I don't really see anything besides the licence issue. > > Altough it is the question whether it's worth the risk getting into > trouble because of a non-Apache licence for code that *maybe* isn't > even used by many people... > > But I think: either the licence is > a) ok -> let's include it > b) not ok -> ask the author to modify the licence or host it somewhere > else The code has to have a license grant for Apache. We are talking about an important *donation* in *code*, not a jar we use.
...though I am not quite sure what I actually really means.
Will donated files always have a Apache licence header plus the comment of the donation. Or is it also possible to have different licence header?
Well, I do have the necessary jar to compile it but I cannot really test in real life. But I am pretty sure we sooner or later gonna have a committer that will have a testing environment... until that we can mark it as unstable block and wait for user feedback.I think that this SAP feature is *very* *very* important, but I'm concerned over how we would maintain it. I would like to know it there's a way in which we can actually have that code tested.
--
Torsten
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
