On Jul 30, 2006, at 12:05 PM, Gwyn Evans wrote:
On 30/07/06, Justin Erenkrantz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:On 7/27/06, Craig L Russell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:> > Can we take the code in the Apache incubator svn, build a release, and> > release it on sf.net (our previous host) without branding it as > > apache? > > "Backporting" the changes to sf.net doesn't appear to me to be an > issue, since the Apache license is very permissive. Legally, you may not call it Apache Wicket (if that's the name you decide on), and as a matter of policy, I'd frown upon such 'backporting' behavior.No need, the intention was to stick with the "Wicket" name for the 1.* releases.The problem that Roller did was that they took code that was in our SVN repository, removed the license blocks and relicensed it to LGPL (I think) and posted it to java.net. In two words, "Uh, no."No, but not really equivalent, as we're already using the Apache licence.- All new development comes to the Incubator. We expect no more 'major' releases to be made outside of the ASF. For example, SA continued their 2.6x line at sf.net and released bug fixes. SA 3.x was developed here at the ASF. This is my concern with Celtix and XFire, but they both promised that no new 'major' versions will be released - only minor bug fixes, but no new features.I'm not sure about this, as an absolute prohibition would imply the 1.x stream would go into maintenance, which might be more restrictive than planned...
The main point for me is that you are forking the Wicket code to create the Apache project, and intent is everything. If you're planning on actively developing in the old community, I'd question the decision to come to Apache.
- Development lists for the next release move to the Incubator lists here, while development discussions around previous versions need to stay where they are now. (i.e. no discussions around cutting 1.2.x releases on our lists.) - User-focused lists can move to the Incubator lists now - they can get support or whatever for older versions; but again, no development discussions on older releases happen here.Hmm, no /discussions/ about making releases from elsewhere seems somewhat extreme, but I guess it's your ball, as it were.
So it's not a hard and fast rule. Your stated intent is to transition the old project to Apache, and use the Apache community for future development.
It would seem odd to transition the discussion of the old project on the Apache mailing lists, as the folks who follow the Apache lists would not be able to get the fruits of the discussion from Apache. And I'd like to see you transition feature discussions to the Apache project and Apache mailing lists.
When you say "Incubator lists", are these really Incubator-specific such that they'd require user re-registration upon exit, or do you just mean Apache-hosted lists?
Separate topic. There is a lot of discussion in the incubator archives about what to call the aliases of incubating projects. I'm afraid that repeating that discussion on this thread would not be recommended.
Craig
/Gwyn --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Craig Russell Architect, Sun Java Enterprise System http://java.sun.com/products/jdo 408 276-5638 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] P.S. A good JDO? O, Gasp!
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
