On 12.07.2004 00:29:00 Peter B. West wrote: > One wonders, however, whether the Board will then require the XML > Graphics subprojects to become TLPs.
The main goal is to reestablish oversight over the projects. A PMC must be involved in the release process, for example, which the XML PMC can't be. If XML Graphics grows too big for us, we will have to split up again. For now, however, I think Batik and FOP are in a similar boat, having a good and functional codebase with a sizeable user base but laming a bit on the development side. The new PMC will only have to care about two subprojects (and a bit of shared code) which should be doable. > One wonders, also, whether the > Board will be able to develop solutions to the licensing difficulties > that have plagued both Batik and FOP. It seems to me that mixed-licence > environments are a fact of Open Source life, and the sooner we develop > mechanisms for dealing with this, the better. We just need to give it some time and to occasionally kick the ball. A number of things have improved over the last 12 months (especially with the AL2.0) so I'm confident that everything will work out eventually. For example, discussions are ongoing about the copyright ownership of contributions: if the the copyright is transferred or if only a irrevocable license is given (it's the latter)... How to handle copyright statements in the source code... Last time we raised some issues it was probably a bad time due to other things going on. We just need to find time to raise certain questions again. Jeremias Maerki --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
