On Jul 17, 2011, at 11:55 AM, Mark Struberg wrote: > Sure, those are only my personal .02! > It's a majority vote so it's not black/white of course. > > It's also not a problem with EPL but just my personal thoughts about our (the > Apache Maven projects) ability to maintain Maven if a bug gets found. > > In my opinion we just cannot guarantee that bugs in Maven which are caused by > a bug in aether can get effectively fixed. We just don't have it under our > own control if there is no safety net of being able to fork-and-fix anymore. > > Btw, the Eclipse Foundation effectively demised projects because of external > dependencies which are not under their control. And that also had nothing to > do with any sentiment regarding a particular license but solely with the > question of the maintainability. >
Which projects are those? There are currently 85 libraries in Orbit (the IP approved repository of 3rd party components) from Apache[1] used across many projects at Eclipse. Apache doesn't have any definitive list of approved 3rd party libraries so it's hard to make a comparison but I don't believe Eclipse has a problem using code from Apache. [1]: http://dev.eclipse.org/viewcvs/viewvc.cgi/org.eclipse.orbit/?root=Tools_Project > LieGrue, > strub > > --- On Sun, 7/17/11, Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> wrote: > >> From: Ralph Goers <ralph.go...@dslextreme.com> >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] incorporate EPL Aether >> To: "Maven Developers List" <dev@maven.apache.org> >> Date: Sunday, July 17, 2011, 3:47 PM >> >> On Jul 17, 2011, at 7:45 AM, Benson Margulies wrote: >> >>> So, the document states that the PMC decided that >> category B's are >>> acceptable by majority vote. As per standard ASF >> community norms, it's >>> better to give people a chance to achieve consensus >> and vote to affirm >>> it than to just stage a vote straight off, so here we >> are. >>> >>> I do not think that Mark's view that all these >> components should fork >>> is a viable plan for this community, but I don't feel >> inclined to >>> elaborate at this point. >> >> I think you are going to have to. Mark isn't the only one >> who has expressed the sentiment. Some of the discussions >> I've seen on changing the relationship Maven has with >> repository managers would surely require changes at the >> Aether layer. >> >> Ralph >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org >> >> > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > Thanks, Jason ---------------------------------------------------------- Jason van Zyl Founder, Apache Maven http://twitter.com/jvanzyl --------------------------------------------------------- First, the taking in of scattered particulars under one Idea, so that everyone understands what is being talked about ... Second, the separation of the Idea into parts, by dividing it at the joints, as nature directs, not breaking any limb in half as a bad carver might. -- Plato, Phaedrus (Notes on the Synthesis of Form by C. Alexander)
