+1 good to see some progress here! I am really looking forward to a first release :-)
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 4:13 PM, Michael MacFadden <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 > > -- http://www.grobmeier.de
