Thanks Cos. If I can rephrase a bit: We are not in a position to care about binary redistribution issues of our upstream projects, because we do not make releases that include binary artifacts, our official releases are source only.
I assume earlier debate about pointing to unofficial binary convenience artifacts stored on non-ASF infrastructure was satisfactorily resolved. It's not my intention to reignite any debate. I don't have concerns. I'm looking to bookmark background information on the subject of binaries for whenever the subject comes up. If anyone has a pointer to such a discussion, I'd greatly appreciate it. Otherwise I will go spelunking in the archives. On Tue, Aug 4, 2015 at 10:12 PM, Konstantin Boudnik <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 04, 2015 at 06:07PM, Andrew Purtell wrote: > > At a source level, I think binary redistribution concerns of components > > packaged by Bigtop don't impact Bigtop releases. Bigtop is largely > > meta-source: build files instructing the assembly of assemblies, or > Puppet > > or similar scripts directing deployment and configuration management. The > > Java and Groovy sources for integration tests has proper licensing, > > contribution, and do not to my knowledge introduce any dependencies on > > forbidden or uncategorized licenses. > > > > On the other hand, when looking at the binary convenience artifacts > > produced by a Bigtop build, wherever a component isn't doing the right > > thing then there could be concerns. I wasn't around when Bigtop was going > > through incubation or in the beginning of its life as a TLP. How was the > > question resolved of what Bigtop should/must do if binary redistribution > > includes components with licenses that aren't in category A? Perhaps one > of > > the old-timers could pass along pointers or some wisdom to the (relative) > > newcomers. I did attempt mail-search.apache.org but this wasn't > immediately > > useful. > > I don't remember exactly, but I think we had some contention around the > binary > distribution. Which has been pretty much resolved by the fact the we are > _not_ > releasing binaries. And the convenience packaging isn't even stored on ASF > infra. I do not see an issue with it, really - at least not a Bigtop's one. > > What others thought about this? > Cos > -- Best regards, - Andy Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White)
