On 28.07.2011 22:43, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
I am going to operate from the assumption that it is not
appropriate to cherry-pick the OOo Apache Extra into the Apache
SVN in any manner, although that code base can certainly be used
consistent with the license already applied to it.
Does anyone recognize a problem with that (i.e., something
critical would be unavailable for use by Apache OpenOffice.org)?
Quite. As mentioned before, as yet un-merged CWS like gnumake4 or
aw080 represent significant amount of work (order of magnitude: man
years, I'd guess). Mathias suggested to extract patches out of
those, and have these patches covered by an extended source code
grant. That should nicely expedite legal review.
Cheers,
-- Thorsten
According to advice given on this list, it is enough to have all files
listed in the software grant statement. For this purpose it would be
enough to have all new files from all cws (new means: not in OOO340m1)
listed. I already created such a list and sent it to Andrew Rist for
further processing.
While we are talking about patches: there might be a way to create
change sets (history) from the cws hg repos.
First, update the cws repo to the OOO340 trunk repository (pull/merge).
Then create a list of "outgoing" change sets (against OOO340 trunk) for
the cws and create patches for all of them by using "hg diff -c" (could
be done by a script). Then remove all patches representing merge change
sets (at least those with a suitable comment could be removed by a
script also), create an svn branch, apply the patches one after another
and commit them. This will create conflicts or adjustment at times, but
they will be carried out in svn. As the cws need review before they can
be intergrated, this work can be a part of the review process and so
perhaps the additional work is bearable.
Regards,
Mathias
