On 28/3/03 0:41, "Gianugo Rabellino" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What am I missing?
org.APACHE...
That name is protected by the license AFAIK, but am no lawyer at all...
Plus, I believe that we have some board resolution implying that all code
owned and copyrighted by the ASF must be stored and actively developed on
the ASF managed infrastructure...
Basically, you can MIRROR a cvs tree, but the minute you contribute to it it
becomes a "product derived" of some sort, and therefore follows another path
(you can't use the "Apache" name, the copyright must be different)...
Basically everything developed outside of our infrastructure NEEDS to have
to have a "copyright transfer" license signed by all parties... It's a
friggin' mess (headache warning ahead) :-(
If it isn't "illegal", let's put another word there: the code is
"unacceptable" by the foundation (as far as my understanding goes)
I'm no lawyer, nor I want to make a stance of good or bad intentions (I'm
not a community activist either)... Just reporting what I grasped given my
position on the infrastructure PMC and being a member...
(Read: see Jakarta's Maven example in recent times)
Pier
BTW (and I have to say this) with this email I don't pretend to endorse any
whatsoever rule or regulation dictated or implied by the Apache Software
Foundation itself. The view expressed above only is my own, gathered from my
experience and my very little and inadequate understanding of law. In any
whatsoever case, my views do not represent nor endorse the Foundation
"official" view on the matter. For official clarification by the ASF, the
only authority I can see is the Foundation board either expressing them
directly or through his appointed PMC representative (in the Cocoon PMC I
believe this person is Stefano, but not being on the PMC, I lost track of
that as well).
