--- On Sun, 9/25/11, Rob Weir <[email protected]> wrote: ... > > Why exactly do we need to move dmake? > > Having copyleft build tools is not necessarily a problem, > especially if the code is not included in the release.
If you don't include it in the release, how are people going to build OpenOffice? > Remember, when we build on Linux we use many GNU utilities. I > don't see anything wrong with just leaving Dmake where it was. > I don't see the source code for GNUmake, gcc, or epm in the repository. We can use GNU stuff but we just can't carry it. > > http://code.google.com/p/ooo-dmake/ > > > > Why Google Code and not apache-extras you might > > wonder: Dmake is something that is unlikely to > > be transferred to Apache and it's a tool that > > both AOOo and LibreO are interested in getting > > rid of. Adding it to apache-extras would've > > given that impression that dmake somehow had a > > future in Apache ;). > > > > Hosting at Apache-Extra does not imply something "has a > future in Apache". Its purpose is specifically for > things that cannot come to Apache. We have the incubation > process for bringing code (and communities) to Apache. There is no Dmake community coming to Apache. Dmake is going out sooner or later, and having it in apache-extras won't help it. > And we have an Apache Labs for starting new > code bases, pre-incubation. But Apache-Extras is > for: > ... > > See: http://community.apache.org/apache-extras/faq.html > Quite honestly I don't see any problem why it can't be in Google Code instead. If someone else want's to maintain it in apache-extras instead I won't object, just let me know and I'll remove it. > > I'm not seeing the benefit here. > > We currently have a dependency on a build tool that any > committer can modify and improve, or fix bugs in. > The only planned improvement is to remove it. I don't think it's acceptable to depend in any way on a hacked copyleft utility. > This is replaced by having the same tool in an external > repository that only one committer has rights to modify. > Really? It seems like I am the only one interested in doing something with it and I am not a committer. If anyone (committer or not) wants access I'll be glad to add them: just send me email addresses. > > What am I missing? I'm not saying you are wrong to do > this. I'm just saying that I don't see why this is a good > thing. > For me it's quite obvious. If you really think 3.4 can be released with that copylefted monster in the tree go ahead. I will keep using the tarball in the Google Code because an independent dmake package is already a dependency to build LibreOffice on FreeBSD and some versions of linux. Pedro.
