On 4/21/06, Rodent of Unusual Size <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Leo Simons wrote:
> > James, dude,
> >
> > *sigh*. I feel like a broken record these days.
> >
> > Nowhere does any policy ever say "you can do stuff which is not permitted by
> > law or for which you have no license". To state the reverse in a policy
> > would
> > be rather, well, redundant. There is ample documentation out there on our
> > websites (and more in the works) to help with complying with the law and
> > various
> > licenses.
>
> No, but the legal aspect isn't necessarily the concept
> looming largest in a developer's mind. So a simple checkbox
> on the page (I'll do it myself in a few minutes, if I figure
> out how to frob the site) to the effect of: 'Have the
> licences of any/all bundled code been identified and noted
> in the release? Has a NOTICE file been included that
> summarises them and their requirements where they differ
> from the Apache licence's? Have their requirements been
> met?' would, IMHO, be a goodness.
Bingo! Ken hit the nail on the head!!! A checklist would do wonders
for podlings and preparing releases. Even though I've been through the
Incubator before, a lot has changed since that time.
Having been around the ASF since the Geronimo incubation began (August
2003), it was never clear to me why these policies were in place and
now I know why - it's a legal issue. Until now that was never clear to
me (I certainly understand that there are legal issues and there are
many files required, but linking the two in my mind just didn't happen
- maybe I'm at fault for not drawing the correct relation between the
two).
Ken is absolutely correct in noting that developers are not of the
same mindset when cranking out a release as the folks who drafted the
Incubator release policies. The main issue at hand is that the release
requirements are spread all around in various documents which makes it
tough to make sure every aspect has been fulfilled. In addition to
these documents, I think a checklist would do wonders for smoothing
the way for future podling projects and I'm certainly willing to help
Ken flesh out just such a checklist.
Furthermore, looking at other projects that have recently graduated is
most definitely *not* a good way to find proper release examples as
some don't even have a LICENSE file, let alone a NOTICE or even the
word Incubator or Incubating in the release name. Developers always
look for code examples to follow and incubation is no different.
Pointing out a couple or three projects that have graduated, have met
100% of the requirements and actually are a good representation would
help immensely. Being able to poke around a project that has been
qualified by the Incubator PMC as having met all requirements would
short circuit a lot of the frustrations.
Let's try to work together to remedy this situation in the interest of
all parties involved and make it easier for future podlings.
Bruce
--
perl -e 'print unpack("u30","D0G)[EMAIL
PROTECTED]&5R\"F)R=6-E+G-N>61E<D\!G;6%I;\"YC;VT*"
);'
Apache Geronimo - http://geronimo.apache.org/
Apache ActiveMQ - http://incubator.apache.org/activemq/
Apache ServiceMix - http://incubator.apache.org/servicemix/
Castor - http://castor.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
