On Nov 14, 2005, at 3:18 PM, Dalibor Topic wrote:
On Mon, Nov 14, 2005 at 09:57:48AM -0500, Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
Leo Simons wrote:
Rant below. Decided not to tone it down.
Leo++
+1 from me, too. sounds like an excellent way to shoot oneself to
slashdot with headlines like "Apache foundation rejects code from IBM,
claims it was stolen from FSF!". Political suicide, should it ever
happen, as it'd force the ASF to play arbiter in disputes that don't
exist.
I don't understand this. I'm suggesting we use a tool internally to
help us *find* problems, both at contribution time as well as ongoing
to ensure that inappropriate 3rd party code doesn't come in during
the regular flow of activity. We'd then examine any issues raised,
and make a judgement based on that.
Suppose a contribution had code from the FSF. (IBMs doesn't.
Period) Would you prefer that we don't find it until much later,
like after a release? Or if we do find it, just accept it to avoid
having to commit "political suicide" by pointing it out to the
contributor?
If we find code stolen from *any* copyright holder, we will
definitely reject the code. Because there is a complete
implementation under a non-opensource license that has been very,
very widely distributed, it behooves us to take what steps we can to
ensure that we don't accidentally incorporate it into our codebase.
geir
(I love it when I can use "behoove" in a sentence. Not as good as
"festoon" or "huggermuggery", but close...)
--
Geir Magnusson Jr +1-203-665-6437
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
