Rob, I personally think that the Apache policy issues here are not entirely worked out, but let me try to summarize the situation.
Starting condition: a marooned bugfix or feature in some other Apache TLP. 1. Communicate with the other TLP, possibly siccing Uwe on their chair. 2. If they are unresponsive or unhelpful, I think that further discussion with the board would be apropos. However, 3. Make a choice between three alternatives: a) Fork their source under your svn, rename packages, and go for it. Include that source in your source release. b) Create a patching process that grabs their release package, fixes it, and builds it, renaming packages. Include the patching process in your source release. c) A volunteer goes off to github and does the necessary, with this being that volunteer's individual effort, not an 'action of the PMC'. In this case, you can hypothetically leave the package names alone, but, in this case you are walking on a somewhat fine line. In this case, you use it as a binary dependency. Does this help? I think that more discussion with the board would be helpful on all of this, and I'd encourage your chair to do so. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@lucene.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@lucene.apache.org
