On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, Scott Eade wrote:
If you want to pursue this, please do. I would guess that it is not ASF
policy to include code for which we do not have permission by a copyright
holder to include it, but I may very well be wrong. If we get a CLA from
the author or from Ingres, I'm +1 for including it, but if we do not get
anything, I'm -0.1 (I do not know any Torque developer who would maintain
this code, and we already have to many untested databases).
Also you said it was Torque 3.1 code, so the db.properties need to be
rewritten as a platform class to be included in 3.2
Thomas
Thomas Fischer wrote:
On Thu, 15 Jun 2006, Scott Eade wrote:
Scott Eade wrote:
I know the developer had intended to submit this to as a path to torque
but I am unaware of any reason why this was not done.
I would guess it was not submitted because we asked the developer for a
CCLA from CA.
Yes, but recent discussion on a different list reveals that a CCLA would not
in fact be required - just a CLA from the developer would have sufficed. I
am unsure as to whether or not the developer moved over to Ingres
Corporation. At the end of the day the code uses the ASL 2.0 license - if we
wanted to bring it into torque it would be a simple matter of asking Ingres
Corp if this is what they want (technically we wouldn't need to ask but it
would be polite). My guess is that they would be fine with it. The nicest
way would be with a CLA from the author, but at the end of the day the code
is only really going to be a variation to one of the existing DB adaptors so
there isn't really going to be that much to it - i.e. even without a CLA it
would IMO be okay to bring in.
Scott
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
