On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 6:50 PM, John D. Ament <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 12:28 PM Werner Keil <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Sorry but I don't understand why every single extension must be developed > > by the ASF, that makes no sense. > > > > E.g. a "DeviceMap competitor" or project that offers similar > functionality > > for the Apache Webserver, http://www.apachemobilefilter.org/ is not an > ASF > > project either ;-) > > > > Thanks for pointing this out. This is probably a TM violation. I'll > follow up outside of Tamaya. > > Please do, especially the use of the "Apache" name could be an issue, but I leave that to you. > > > > > If existing ones like Oliver's Joda module have to stay there, I could > > understand that (especially if the package remains "org.apache.*") but > > nobody could prevent me, Otavio or others from offering Tamaya (or > Archaius > > or Apache Commons Config;-) support under > > https://github.com/unitsofmeasurement/uom-lib or a similar module to > > combine it with JSR 363. > > > > The code has been developed under the ASF. If you're going to fork it, > fine, fork it. No one is going to stop you as long as you have proper > notice/license in place. However, an Apache project cannot have multiple > organizations running it. Apache projects are a group of individuals, not > a set of organizations. If its Tamaya anything, its an apache name. You > can build brand new extensions for Tamaya outside of the ASF, but the > current suite is owned by the ASF. > > > > > > > That statement forces me to scratch another "itch" again, so if it would > be > > a violation for Oliver, Phil or Anatole to put certain extension modules > > (like the JodaTime one) into their own privat GitHub repository, then > Mark > > must certainly violate what the ASF expects by putting his stuff into his > > own private repo under "org.apache.geronimo": > > > > https://github.com/struberg/javaConfig/tree/master/impl/ > src/main/java/org/apache/geronimo/config > > > > > > > Or can you explain the difference? > > > > Sure, I'll explain the difference. 1. No, Mark cannot use > "org.apache.geronimo" unless he plans to donate to Geronimo (which he > does). 2. If its source code from Tamaya, you're free to fork it, its just > no longer an ASF represented project. It gets very hairy, and as a result > I would prefer to not introduce an outside issue like this. Basically, we > find podlings doing this a lot and it is not the Apache Way. Its fine to > build a side-community derived from the main community. Its not OK when > the side community is the same as the main community and discussions around > the side community happen within the ASF's resources. > > > So e.g. for Oliver's JodaTime support it is a good question where to best put that, but either under the "Type support" kind of repo or the one for "Integration with other technologies and efforts" it should certainly be able to keep it then. An interesting question would be Oliver's statement >If they are finished we should be included in our extension projects. Judging from the experience with DeviceMap (where we saw a vast majority of the project being donated by OpenDDR.org and its GitHub repositories, later a former team member forked a fraction of a "design study" on how JSON could be used into his own GitHub repo) there are possible ways for Tamaya to accept some extension developed indepently not only when it was started. As well as possible ways to fork certain parts. If they were found too far away from the core interest and goals of Tamaya or say only have very few who would ever contribute. > > > > I don't care what Mark does in that repo, that's between him and the ASF, > > but I believe you're also in the board, so I'm sure you know best if he > > violates ASF code of conduct or other regulations by doing that ;-) > > > > Sounds very off topic to me. > > > I don't see why, but you answered the questions on his code above ;-) Werner > > > > > On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 6:14 PM, John D. Ament <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > This would be a violation of what the ASF expects. Is there a reason > > they > > > need to be developed outside the ASF? > > > > > > On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 5:50 AM Oliver B. Fischer < > > > [email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > IMHO we should have two extension module projects. One for additional > > > > formats, converters/data types and so on. The second for modules > > support > > > > for connecting Tamaya with other systems as Consul or etcd. Both > should > > > > be ASF repositories. > > > > > > > > As we said during our last hangout: New modules should be developed > > > > outside of our ASF repositories. If they are finished we should be > > > > included in our extension projects. > > > > > > > > Oliver > > > > > > > > Am 18.08.16 um 00:17 schrieb Anatole Tresch: > > > > > Hi all > > > > > > > > > > I have put together a short overview about the current > > > > > Tamaya Module > > > > > s, including my personal recommendation, which modules should stay > > in > > > > the > > > > > core project and which modules may be moved into a separate repo. I > > > also > > > > > added s small note on the most important task, which IMO have to be > > > done > > > > > per module. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ > 1aBGG7h7okdiW0wzCKa7VfuQY8BLH6 > > > q4-iIfg7FOo67A/edit?usp=sharing > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > J Anatole > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > N Oliver B. Fischer > > > > A Schönhauser Allee 64, 10437 Berlin, Deutschland/Germany > > > > P +49 30 44793251 > > > > M +49 178 7903538 > > > > E [email protected] > > > > S oliver.b.fischer > > > > J [email protected] > > > > X http://xing.to/obf > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
