On Fri, 16 Mar 2001, Ted Husted wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > Did we had any complaint from Sam or Roy regarding this process ? Is this
> > based on a lawyer advice - or just guessing ?
>
> For now, I am suggesting that we propose to do what we know is safe. I
> mentioned before that if Roy said it was OK, then I would have no qualm.
>
> Roy made it very clear that the PMC's first responsibility was the
> legality of what the programmers are doing.
We are talking about commons - which is not the PMC. And the discussion is
about whether a jakarta project can release a standalone component or not
- with you assuming that only the commons project can do that. Insuring
the legality and the "brand" is shared by all jakarta projects - the
commons are not different in this aspect from any other project ( except
that they'll make decisions about code bases they are not involved with )
> Right now, the only release process we have is that a subproject votes
> on a specific code base and takes responsibility for distributing and
> supporting the product. Having a shared CVS doesn't change that.
Yes, that's exactly what I said - a jakarta subproject should be able to
vote and take responsibility for distributing a product - it can be
developed in it's own workspace or in a shared CVS.
> This is not about Agora. We must cope with any and all committers who
> might use the shared CVS to develop code, and then want to distribute it
> under the Apache brand.
Well - it is about agora, since the change you want to make doesn't affect
or have anything to do with the code developed in the shared workspace by
random developers.
It is about code supported by top-level jakarta projects,
and you restrict their ability to distribute common code, forcing all
components to be under the control of "commons".
Yes, all commiters can develop in the shared workspace - but your change
doesn't have anything to do with that - it's about how jakarta projects
can ( or cannot ) release components.
> > It's scary that a proposal can be "edited" or "clarified" in such a
> > significant way after it was finalized and without a vote.
>
> This whole thread started as a vote Costin. So far there are five
> positive votes (Craig, Geir, Morgan, David and me), and two negative
> (you and Ignacio).
Well, what I said was that I don't want my name associated with a proposal
that makes the code developed and shared by jakarta projects "second
class" and controled by an entity that has nothing to do with it's
development or support.
I didn't realized it was a vote ( it looked to me more like a discussion,
not a formal proposal ), but if this is the case please remove my name
from the proposal. And I must say this is very unfair - we had an
agreement and compromise and then you change it to a no-op ( since
projects are allowed anyway to release apache code - the whole phrase is
just stating what is already aproved and well-known).
> We haven't made the change yet, since Remy, Rodney, and Conor have not
> voted.
Costin
