BTW, I just updated the code at [1] to use org.apacheextras and also
updated the description of the project to make it clear that it's not Apache
releases nor is it Apache code.
Cheers,
Chris
[1] http://code.google.com/a/apache-extras.org/p/oodt-pushpull-plugins/
On Dec 29, 2011, at 10:30 PM, M
Hey Guys,
I was talking with Greg, and I think I'm OK with org.apacheextras as
the namespace.
It sounds like Noirin thought that was cool and so did Mark S.
Are folks here on ComDev cool with that namespace for our Extras
projects? If so, I'll update my COMDEV-65 patch with docs stating that
and
Hi Nóirín,
On Dec 29, 2011, at 9:21 PM, Nóirín Plunkett wrote:
>>
>> Mark Struberg had another concrete suggestion: kudos to him for proposing
>> using
>> org.apachextras.oodt (implied). I could live with that, but don't believe I
>> (or anyone else)
>> should have to.
>>
>
> I strongly pref
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 8:59 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
>
> No, that's not what I'm proposing. I'm proposing to use Apache Extras, a
> supposedly sanctioned
> "associated" and not "external" effort that supposedly is amenable (per its
> own explanation page
> that I've cited several tim
Hi Dennis,
On Dec 29, 2011, at 5:56 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> Funny, your conclusion is exactly contrary to my reasoning.
>
> It strikes me that you are talking about extending the decentralized
> governance of the org.apache.oodt.* namespace (i.e., the ability to add
> branches and ne
Funny, your conclusion is exactly contrary to my reasoning.
It strikes me that you are talking about extending the decentralized governance
of the org.apache.oodt.* namespace (i.e., the ability to add branches and new
types) to an external effort that, coincidentally, happens to be conducted b
Hey Christian,
On Dec 29, 2011, at 12:49 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>> [...snip...]
>>
>> To avoid that nuclear option, I proposed 2 concrete suggestions and even
>> volunteered
>> to work up a patch that implements the one with less sweeping change. IOW, I
>> offered to put my money where m
Hey Dennis,
On Dec 29, 2011, at 12:59 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> Thanks Chris,
>
> Just one caution. I mentioned authority over namespaces, not authority over
> Apache Extras. The question is what constitutes authorized use of additions
> to the org.apache.* hierarchy for namespaces. O
Thanks Chris,
Just one caution. I mentioned authority over namespaces, not authority over
Apache Extras. The question is what constitutes authorized use of additions to
the org.apache.* hierarchy for namespaces. On reflection, I think the answer
should be independent of Apache Extras.
And t
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> Hey Christian,
>
> On Dec 29, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
>
>> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 9:23 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
If you are saying this is compatible with ALv2 ? Then why use Apache
Extras instead o
> they include runtime dependencies (via Maven2) on LGPL code.
Sorry, I think I just misunderstood your scenario.
If it's just runtime linked to a LGPL project then all is fine and you can have
your stuff ALv2.
But there are other projects around which will need to use GPL I fear :/
> Sup
It is an interesting idea that the apache-extras.org domain be usable this way.
There is no mapping to projects directly (it being a mapping into
code.google.com instead).
Nevertheless, if the project label is "mylabel" then
org.apache_extras.mylabel.* would work as a technical solution. (The
Hi Dennis,
Thanks for replying, comments below:
On Dec 29, 2011, at 12:13 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>
> (2) for a conforming implementation of a type that is defined by an Apache
> project
This is the situation that the OODT PushPull plugins fall into.
>
> This is no different than if the
Hey Christian,
On Dec 29, 2011, at 12:29 PM, Christian Grobmeier wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 9:23 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
>>> If you are saying this is compatible with ALv2 ? Then why use Apache
>>> Extras instead of just the oodt SVN official repo in Apache ?
>>
>> But that's exactly the
Hi Mark,
On Dec 29, 2011, at 12:23 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
>> If you are saying this is compatible with ALv2 ? Then why use Apache
>> Extras instead of just the oodt SVN official repo in Apache ?
>
> But that's exactly the point! It is NOT ALv2 because it seems that Chris'
> project compiles a
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 9:23 PM, Mark Struberg wrote:
>> If you are saying this is compatible with ALv2 ? Then why use Apache
>> Extras instead of just the oodt SVN official repo in Apache ?
>
> But that's exactly the point! It is NOT ALv2 because it seems that Chris'
> project compiles against G
> If you are saying this is compatible with ALv2 ? Then why use Apache
> Extras instead of just the oodt SVN official repo in Apache ?
But that's exactly the point! It is NOT ALv2 because it seems that Chris'
project compiles against GPL sources and thus also must be GPL licensed.
Would it be po
Hi Luciano,
On Dec 29, 2011, at 12:13 PM, Luciano Resende wrote:
>>
>> Who asked to release the code? I just want an SVN to throw the code up at.
>> If you look at oodt-pushpull-plugins [1], the LICENSE.txt file is ALv2. The
>> code
>> we wrote (in Java) is ALv2. The code includes a runtime Mav
I think this situation is very clear-cut.
The only two ways an Apache namespace should show up in an Apache Extras
project is
(1) for something of Apache that the project depends on: an external
dependency, and
(2) for a conforming implementation of a type that is defined by an Apache
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J)
wrote:
> (removing community@ from the CC list; aren't we trying to kill that thread?)
>
> Hi Ross,
>
> Thanks for replying. Comments below:
>
> On Dec 29, 2011, at 11:04 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> [...snip...]
>
>> >
>> > It's my understan
On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 10:47 AM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:
> I don't know if I'm subscribed to dev@community, so any future replies
> may not reach me.
>
> Let me give you what I think is an equivalent analogy.
>
> Assume Microsoft sets up a community hosting site for projects related
> to Microso
(removing community@ from the CC list; aren't we trying to kill that thread?)
Hi Ross,
Thanks for replying. Comments below:
On Dec 29, 2011, at 11:04 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
[...snip...]
> >
> > It's my understanding that anyone can start up a project at Apache Extras,
> > in which case, if tha
I don't know if I'm subscribed to dev@community, so any future replies
may not reach me.
Let me give you what I think is an equivalent analogy.
Assume Microsoft sets up a community hosting site for projects related
to Microsoft products.
Assume you are an employee of Microsoft.
Assume that Micr
Hey Mike,
Thanks for your reply. I get the analogy. More comments below.
On Dec 29, 2011, at 10:47 AM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:
> [...snip...]
> You, as an ASF member and PMC chair are equivalent to the employee in
> this scenario. Even though you are an ASF member or PMC chair, you
> do not ha
Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On Dec 29, 2011 6:33 PM, "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <
chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
>
> (cc'ing dev@community and setting reply-to: header so that replies
> go there)
>
> Hi Mike,
>
> First off, thanks for replying. Comments inl
(cc'ing dev@community and setting reply-to: header so that replies
go there)
Hi Mike,
First off, thanks for replying. Comments inline below:
On Dec 29, 2011, at 6:33 AM, Mike Kienenberger wrote:
> I am not an official Apache member, but here's my take on it.
>
> The Extras project area is for
(moving this thread over from commun...@apache.org, per Bertrand's suggestion)
Hey Guys,
I was reading [1] and I noticed item 3.1 and 3.2 stating that projects at
Extras shouldn't
use the org.apache namespace (e.g., if Java), and they shouldn't use the apache
project
name in their extras name.
27 matches
Mail list logo
