On 04.04.2013 10:17, Ryan Ollos wrote: > On Wed, Apr 3, 2013 at 9:37 PM, Peter Koželj <[email protected]> wrote: > >> If I understand things correctly we need to get code grant regardless of >> the license. >> In that case the willingness of authors to give them is more important than >> current license. >> > I discussed the issue of the code grant with the plugin author this evening > and he's not willing to sign the document. He has given me full control to > develop the plugin wherever and in whatever ways that I see fit, but he has > "no interest in entering legal arrangements with the ASF". I have no idea > why that is, but I feel that I will make no progress in changing his mind > by continuing a discussion of the matter with him.
A code grant is not necessary if we don't have to relicense the plugin. After all, the ASF does not have a code grant for Trac, and we have no trouble keeping a modified copy in our source tree and releasing that copy. It all depends on the license. If it's the same as Trac's we can simply create another vendor branch and make modifications locally. Of course, it'd be much easier if we could just develop the original tree; and even better if the plugin could be made multi-hosted, i.e., compatible with both Trac and BH (whith possibly exposing additional features in BH, e.g., multiproduct awareness). -- Brane -- Branko Čibej Director of Subversion | WANdisco | www.wandisco.com
