kristian, I want to repeat that b.b. has been perfectly hospitable about my little patch and proposal for a bigger one. your message, with which I have no disagreement, might give a casual reader another impression.
On Jul 17, 2011, at 4:35 PM, Kristian Rosenvold <[email protected]> wrote: > sø., 17.07.2011 kl. 09.26 -0400, skrev Benson Margulies: >> After re-reading the ASF legal licensing policy, I'm starting this >> thread to formally propose that the Maven incorporate versions of >> Aether that are EPL without an AL dual-license. As per convention, >> someone can make a VOTE thread once voices have been heard here. >> >> EPL is 'Category B'. Binary redistribution with a notice is acceptable. >> >> Maven incorporated many plexus components, and at least some of them >> have IP question marks hanging over them (c.f. the discussion of the >> plexus-utils replacement). I, therefore, don't see any real impact on >> the users of Maven in adopting EPL copies of Aether. To the extent >> that Maven is a development tool, the user impact of category B >> components is lighter than with something that is routinely >> incorporated in larger systems. To the extent, on the other hand, that >> Maven is embeddable, this could be a problem for someone. However, >> that argument would make a lot more sense if every other scrap of the >> ecosystem were fully-vetted category A. >> >> Someone might wonder, 'Why has Benson decided to tilt at this >> particular windmill?' >> >> Well, some itches of mine have led into Aether, and I'd feel fairly >> silly investing a lot of time and energy in Aether patches that will >> never see the light of day in Maven. So, I'm inclined to push the >> community to choose a course of action. I see three possibilities: >> >> 1) Just make the notice arrangements to use Aether under EPL. >> 2) Actively see if Sonatype will put the dual license back. >> 3) Fork the last dual version. > > Hervé and I are aether committers, and if I wasn't so /extremely busy/ > here on Mallorca I'd look at your patch. Opposed to Mark and Ralph, I > have no qualms accepting an EPL 3rd party dependency, If you start > showing an interest in aether matters I'm sure you'll get that commit > bit pretty quickly yourself. > > I really just want to get over this license-of-the week crap > we've been seeing for aether and sisu, which I think is totally > unacceptable. Assuming aether actually goes to stay at eclipse I'm happy > with that, until so happens I still want to keep the asl version (and > fork if necessary). > > Technically, not that much has happened since the last ASL versioned > aether, so there's no real gap to talk about. I /wish/ there was some > kind of change in the pipeline that I could say made the aether/maven > split problematic. But there isn't, is there ? I am much more worried > about change in maven at a higher level than interfaces. I somehow sense > that pom version 5 is never going to happen; but that's not aether's > fault..? > > > Kristian > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
