Let me explain, maybe the goodwill will prevail. Otherwise this will turn into another example of a sad finish of an exciting jorney.
Threats will not lead to the best outcome, so drop them. It is trivial to change the package names and include the ASF license in the distribution. All other "legal issues" can be worked out as well. I have not breached a signed contract or intentionally harmed anyone, so back off and open your minds. If not helped too much, I have at least not caused any harm to this community so it is the least to say surprising to see such reactions. Now, let's do some constructive talking. You probably remember the endless threads that were started in the last few months regarding the complexity of Cocoon and the fact that it continuously misses its release dates. I am only refering to them to point out that not everything is perfect around here. More specificly: As it stands XMLForm is way behind the XForms standards. It was about a year ago when Torsten, Konstantin, and I invested a lot of time to bring to light the initial version of what seems to be a significant improvement to Cocoon. Since then it has been polished by many people and stabilized somewhere around September last year. Ever since, I have been planning to invest time into another major release which would bring the module up to the latest standards. However such an initiative will obviously require a lot of discussions, trial, errors and rollbacks, I did not want to jeopardize the 2.1 release which has been first planned for release in November and has been postponed indefinitely ever since. It is hard to not notice that C2.1 has been in the "clean-up" stage forever. I understand that moving to a top level domain is time consuming and it is very important for the future of the project. So, Stefano, since you have your PMC chairman hat on, tell me if we can create an incubator project. I will gladly commit the new code to it. If not, what other options do you suggest. -=Ivelin=- ----- Original Message ----- From: "Pier Fumagalli" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 9:07 PM Subject: Re: [ANN] XMLForm as a standalone servlet toolkit > 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).
