Guys,

don't want to spread to much confusion now.... but just heard of this
in another mail:

[1] - 
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/couchdb-dev/201109.mbox/%[email protected]%3E
[2] - https://twitter.com/#!/davisp/status/117446331714383872

Seems like GIT is allowed - but have no proof for it
Mercurial is not GIT - but very GITish. Maybe this is an option for
you? If yes, you should ask at infra if that works or not.

Cheers
Christian

On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 4:20 PM, Michael MacFadden
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Yuri,
>
> I wanted to coordinate with you on this.  Is there a date/time that works 
> well for you.  I have a least one code review I owe you.  Would you prefer to 
> get the couple outstanding code reviews completed so you can get that code 
> checked in before the move.
>
> Basically, we need to establish a mini code freeze.
>
> ~Michael
>
> On Sep 18, 2011, at 11:43 PM, Yuri Z wrote:
>
>> We postponed the move until 28-th Sep as by Michael's request.  The Wiki for 
>> PMC was updated accordingly on 13-th Sep.
>> BTW, @Michael, when are you planning to complete the move?
>>
>> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 8:25 AM, Doug <[email protected]> wrote:
>> 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
>> >
>>
>
>



-- 
http://www.grobmeier.de

Reply via email to