arc:~ douglasl$ svn ls https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/wave/ branches/ site/ tags/ trunk/ arc:~ douglasl$ svn ls https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/wave/trunk arc:~ douglasl$
...? ~ Doug. On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 11:22 PM, Christian Grobmeier <[email protected]>wrote: > +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 >
