I'm trying to coax out a release of Apache Thrift and ran into a
few obstacles. Maybe you can offer me a little guidance?
First, I found that the CCLA from Facebook excludes
contributions from 3rd parties who wrote code for Thrift
prior to the move to Apache. With the exception of imeem.com,
all of the corporate entities appear to have a CCLA on file
with us. I've attempted to contact the folks from imeem.com
to request that a CCLA be filed for their Thrift work.
I've also found that there are 6 individuals listed in the
Facebook CCLA who do not have ICLAs with us and have accordingly
contacted them as well.
So the first question is: do we have any contingency strategies
for the likely situation where not all past contributors to Thrift
will have paperwork on file in the near future? Can Thrift still
cut a release or does that block it? Thrift was in fact an open
source project prior to coming here, and it *has* released stuff under
an alternate license. Does that mitigate the issue at all?
The second question regards the LICENSE file. I'm accustomed to
seeing all the licenses for all the code to be distributed listed
in the LICENSE file, but don't see anywhere within the Incubator
docs that this concept is mandatory. I've been pushing Thrift to
do this because that's the way I've usually seen it done but the
idea hasn't gained any traction with the thrift devs yet. Is there
such a policy, does it simply constitute best practice, or am I
barking up the wrong tree?
The third issue is that Thrift intends to distribute with an LGPL
dependency on their build system. I'm familiar with the scary language
adopted by the legal team regarding the LGPL, but don't consider this
situation to be problematic since it's just a few Makefiles and such.
Will I need to get special permission from legal for this?
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
