Dear PMC members,

It would be good to hear the voice of more of you. Even if it's just
"I agree", please respond, so we know that you're aware. This belongs
to "FreeMarker Maven Plugin" thread basically, but I though a
"[DISCUSS]" and a summary might yields more response.

Ben Jackson and Mark Malynn from Oath Inc. has offered contributing
https://github.com/yahoo/freemarker-maven-plugin to the FreeMarker
project. It's a fairly small and new code base (no legal history to
untangle), and aims to allow generating code or other files as part of
a Maven build. (We plan to generalize this a bit later, but see
earlier discussion). I propose that we accept this contribution, and
continue on the following manner:

- Create Git repository "freemarker-generator", add LICENSE and NOTICE
  to it. (This is consistent how we structure things in the 2.x
  branch, i.e., having separate freemarker-<something> repository for
  each product that have independent release/deployment cycles.)

- Wait for the two authors sign an ICLA.

- Wait for Oath Inc. representative to sign a CCLA, listing said two
  authors under "Initial list of designated employees".

- They will change license headers and package names on
  https://github.com/yahoo/freemarker-maven-plugin

- Then they do a pull request on our "freemarker-generator"
  repository, and we merge it. After that, development continues
  directly in our repository. This is the same lightweight approach
  we have followed with freemarker-online-tester, so I'm hoping we can
  do that here as well.

The name of the product will be "Apache FreeMarker Generator" (but it
won't have a separate domain), and the Java package name is
org.apache.freemarker.generator, Maven coordinate
org.apache.freemarker:freemarker-generator-<module>.

Do you agree?

-- 
Thanks,
 Daniel Dekany

Reply via email to