John O'Hara wrote: > I don't think its the same as releasing another projects code. > A good example is when SubVersion included APR as part of its code > base. No one would have confused that as a release of APR, and > it was patched and modded, and the APR team were kept in the loop.
Actually, in spite of a wide open-door policy from the apr team to the svn and httpd developer communities, it indicates a breakdown of apr meeting the needs of svn (it's second consumer) and in svn failing to effectively participate in apr. So I actually find it a bad example :) But the expat and pcre bundled packages are similar examples. For a very long time, official distributions of pcre wouldn't even interoperate. We aren't talking the few build choice changes to better integrate, but the code itself. > There is a difference between "release" and distribute. > We're asking if a project can distribute some arbitrary SVN point in > anothers repository, not if they can release it. If you ship code *here at the ASF* as your project's tarball, you are releasing it. This IS the very definition of a release, and attempting to split hairs on the subject is what made this thread run away. Even if SVN doesn't ship the official APR, it will land in /usr/local/lib and therefore overlays the release. Anything we distribute (e.g. svn's apr, or apr's expat) is released by us no matter if it's an arbitrary svn point, or if it's a specific release. Of course, svn is not an ASF project so they don't (have any reason to) follow our tar - vote - distribute rules. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
