I think we have reached a consensus on the clean check in approach. We should be able to mention that we have decided on the approach in the report. Should we also set a target date for doing the migration? I am more than happy to do the migration. I think we should give ourselves 2 weeks to actually move the code over, just to be safe. This way we can discuss any organization or structural issues that may come up.
If we have a method and a date, then I think we have a good plan to put in the board report. ~Michael On Sep 12, 2011, at 2:58 PM, Upayavira wrote: > > > On Monday, September 12, 2011 1:12 PM, "Jasper Horn" > <[email protected]> wrote: >> Upayavira wrote: >>> Right, the source code is the project's most valuable possession. The >>> ASF as a charitable organisation exists to produce software, therefore >>> it must be in control of its main asset, the asset it exists to create! >> >> Talk about "control", "possessions" and "assets" doesn't sound much >> like Open Source to me... > > All software is owned (with the exception of public domain). Open source > software makes strong use of copyright law, which is all about > 'ownership'. Open source isn't about ownership, it is about licensing. > Apache 'owns' the code (actually, owns the copyright on the collection, > that is made up of individual parts which are owned by the respective > authors), but then, in keeping with its non-profit mission, it makes > that code available with a very liberal license to anyone who wants to > use it. > > As a part of that, people have come to trust Apache software, and that > needs some protecting - making sure that we keep to an approach that is > worthy of that trust. So yes, Apache does protect its code. Apache does > protect its trademarks. It is all Apache exists for. It protects its > code and the methods used to create it so that it *can* make it > available to the public, for no charge. > >>> There's scope to host code on git on Apache infrastructure, but that >>> requires volunteers to assist with a deployment. >> >> What would need to be done? > > You can join the [email protected] mailing list and ask there. I'm > not so sure about all the details. But bear in mind that the kind of > install that Apache needs is more substantial than most. It needs a > workflow that effectively tracks code's origins (SVN does this well, > with git, as I understand it, there are ways to work around this). But, > to be honest, I'm not sure what the current road blocks are other than > volunteer time. > > Upayavira
