On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 9:23 PM, Mark Struberg <strub...@yahoo.de> wrote: >> If you are saying this is compatible with ALv2 ? Then why use Apache >> Extras instead of just the oodt SVN official repo in Apache ? > > But that's exactly the point! It is NOT ALv2 because it seems that Chris' > project compiles against GPL sources and thus also must be GPL licensed. > > Would it be possible to have it under the package org.apacheextras ? > If we don't even allow that, then we can just close down apacheextras.org - > because then there is no use for it imo.
+1 Leads me to the question... if I fork an asf project on github and do some work on it, am I required to change the org.apache namespace? If no, third parties can release code with the apache namespace (and they actually do) and then I ask myself why Chris should not be able to use the namespace. CHeers Christian > > Of course this all implies that apacheextras will make a prominent mentioning > that apacheextras != ASF and apacheextras might not only contain ALv2 > licensed sources but also others. > > > LieGrue, > strub > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Luciano Resende <luckbr1...@gmail.com> >> To: dev@community.apache.org >> Cc: >> Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 9:13 PM >> Subject: Re: Apache Extras Question >> >> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) >> <chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote: >>> (removing community@ from the CC list; aren't we trying to kill that >> thread?) >>> >>> Hi Ross, >>> >>> Thanks for replying. Comments below: >>> >>> On Dec 29, 2011, at 11:04 AM, Ross Gardler wrote: >>> [...snip...] >>> >>>> > >>>> > It's my understanding that anyone can start up a project at >> Apache Extras, >>>> > in which case, if that person doesn't have an availid here at >> the ASF, and >>>> > doesn't have an ICLA on file, then that's another >> situation that I won't >>>> > speculate on. What I'm much more interested in is in the >> situation I presented >>>> > within this thread. I have an availid. I am an ASF member. I was >> looking >>>> > at Apache Extras as a place to share some Apache OODT plugins that >>>> > leverage code that is LGPL licensed, that I couldn't otherwise >> share within >>>> > the normal Apache OODT SVN home. Prior to me coming to Apache >> Extras, >>>> > this has been code housed in an internal JPL SVN repository for >> years, even >>>> > before we brought the software to Apache. I'd like to use >> Apache Extras to >>>> > facilitate sharing with an even broader community and to share the >> plugins >>>> > we've developed (which themselves are ALv2 licensed) with >> others. >>>> >>>> The ASF does not release code under any license other than the Apache >> license, >>> >>> Who asked to release the code? I just want an SVN to throw the code up at. >>> If you look at oodt-pushpull-plugins [1], the LICENSE.txt file is ALv2. The >> code >>> we wrote (in Java) is ALv2. The code includes a runtime Maven2 dependency >>> on libraries that provide FTP protocol implementations (Ftp4Che [2] and >> JvFtp [3]) >>> that are LGPL licensed. >>> >> >> If you are saying this is compatible with ALv2 ? Then why use Apache >> Extras instead of just the oodt SVN official repo in Apache ? >> >> -- >> Luciano Resende >> http://people.apache.org/~lresende >> http://twitter.com/lresende1975 >> http://lresende.blogspot.com/ >> -- http://www.grobmeier.de https://www.timeandbill.de
