On 6/23/06, Andreas Korneliussen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Andrew McIntyre wrote:
> On 6/23/06, Jean T. Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Andreas Korneliussen wrote:
>> > Jean T. Anderson wrote:
>> >
>> > In this case, it is Rick (the release manager) who builds the RC, and
>> > who makes it available before JDBC4 goes GA. I guess it would be up to
>> > him to take the legal responsibility.
>
>
> The RM for any Apache release is responsible for evaluating the
> legalities of the situation surrounding a release and do what is
> necessary to protect the ASF from legal action. See sections 4 and 8
> of the ICLA.
>
Thanks for confirming that it is the RM who is responsible for the
legalities.
</snip>
I responded to this part of your post, and wanted to clarify that Derby
does not build the RC, it is the RM who does it.
Yes, because it is the RM as an individual that ultimately builds and
publishes the release as an official Apache release on behalf of the
ASF. Once it is published, though, the bits belong to the ASF, not the
release manager or the Derby project. I'm pretty sure that's what Jean
meant by 'Apache is ultimately responsible for the release'.
> Can Derby legally build an RC with the GA bits set before JDBC 4.0 is
> GA? --Understanding that the RC will be readily available to anyone to
> download?
Anyone can check out the Derby source tree, and build a "derby" with the
GA bit set at any time. If anyone does that, it clearly does not mean
that Derby has gone GA with JDBC4, and that the community is held
legally responsible.
True. But we're not talking about just anybody. If a member of the
Derby community does put together a release candidate (that would need
to report itself as a GA version) and publishes it on a website for
others to vote on, then the community could be held responsible.
andrew
