> On Fri, 16 Mar 2001, Ted Husted wrote:
>
> > > A component that is built by a project as part of the sandbox/agora
isn't
> > > supposed to be released to the public - because of quality concerns.
Yet a
> > > component that is accepted by commons commiters can be released, even
if
> > > it has a smaller set of commiters and less review.
> >
> > Code or documentation cannot be released to the public directly from the
> > shared CVS for *legal* concerns regarding use of the Apache brand. All
> > anyone has asked is that one of subprojects using this code release it
> > with their own codebase. And that is all the clarified #20 says.
>
> Can you explain a bit more - what are the legal concerns ? Most of
> us are programmers, and I just can't get it - how the same piece of code
> is "legal" if it is distributed as part of a jakarta project, but it is
> ilegal if it is distributed standalone.
>
> Does that mean that if tomcat is using a threadpool component it can't
> release an upgrade of only the thread pool ? But it become legal if the
> same package is distributed out of commons ?
>
> And how is Apache brand protected by releasing code under a project where
> most voter don't know what they vote on ( since they were not involved in
> the development ), but it's not protected if the code is
> released by a vote of the people who support and test it ?
>
> Did we had any complaint from Sam or Roy regarding this process ? Is this
> based on a lawyer advice - or just guessing ?
I totally agree with Costin here. I can't figure out how there can be a
problem since :
- the code was already distributed and available as part of another Jakarta
project
- it's just a matter of moving the code to somewhere else and repackaging it
differently, and anyone outside the ASF can do that (take the threadpool
from TC 3, repackage it standalone, and distribute it)
Remy
