On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 4:33 PM, Nick Kew <n...@apache.org> wrote: > > On 14 Aug 2010, at 09:31, Urs Lerch wrote: > >> GPL-licenced, implemented in >> Ruby and completely based on other OSS-licensed components, > > If it's been GPL-licensed, you'll need the permission of all contributors > to re-license it. Have you kept meticulous records of all contributions > over the lifetime of the project so you can expect to be able to contact > everyone?
It is mentioned in the proposal that all the contributors are well-known. In one place it says that only 2 people have written code, and elsewhere a Debian developer has contributed as well. From my PoV it sounds that the re-licensing should be a reasonable effort. > What about the required OSS-licensed components? You mention > MySQL - you'd (probably) want a specific exception for that, in the > manner of the APR's one. The proposal also mentions an intention to move away from MySQL towards a NoSQL implementation (of there are a couple here at ASF). However, I have no clue how feasible this is for a Ruby app. I guess CouchDB would be no problem to access, but Cassandra/HBase ?? Anyway, I think the licensing issues are well addressed in the proposal. For me, the challenge during Incubation would revolve mostly around community. Perhaps it is exactly what Logging project needs to infuse more interest and activity, and that we will see folks from that background joining in... I don't think the current "weak" community is reason enough to prevent incubation, only pointing it out as a substantial challenge which may slow down the process. Cheers -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
