incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steven Noels <>
Subject Re: Making Daffodil Replicator an Open Source : Suggestion
Date Wed, 18 Aug 2004 12:03:36 GMT
On 18 Aug 2004, at 12:29, Ashish Srivastava wrote:

> :0)    Nice point. 20 developers will work part time (This figure  
> could be
> 10, 15, 20 or 30) beacuse, as you said, there would need to be a  
> critical
> mass of initial contributors. If there are developers out there who  
> consider
> Replicator an exiting project to work on, then we wouldnt need to  
> deploy
> this number. It could come down to 3 - 5 developers.

I find this rather confusing. One of the criteria for exiting  
incubation is a *diverse* set of committers - i.e. an appropriate  
proportion of Daffodil "for-pay" developers but also non-Daffodil  
folks. If your idea of the original number of committers (coming with  
the donation of the project) varies between 3 and 30, I'm rather  
suspicious about who you consider to be a committer. Having no idea of  
the size of your codebase and your operations, I can tell you that the  
usual initial set of committers of other projects hardly ever surpasses  
5 to 8 folks, and the rest will need to be voted in using common ASF  
procedures. You as a commercial entity have no control over this other  
than what is to be expected in a community project, and the Incubator  
will check whether you are following ASF guidelines.

> We do expect it be very successful; however, lots of work needs to be  
> done
> on the same. Primarily, we need to ensure that Replicator can  
> communicate
> with every known database server. Once that is done, a suitable  
> business
> model (Red Hat, MySQL etc) can be built around it.
> The branding boost won't hurt either.    ;0)
> Just one thing ... Can we get some feedback from readers of this mail  
> with
> regards to the provision of 'reasonable' attribution of code to the  
> original
> author?

To give you an idea about what is decent to add to an ASF distribution,  
have a look at the Cocoon CREDITS: 

Apart from such a file, it will be hard to find other attributions in  
the Cocoon codebase linkable to a specific single commercial entity,  
since having these would carry a false sense of ownership over the code  
or project. Of course, our license permits repackaging and  
redistribution, so you could always redistribute a more commercially  
labeled version of the code through your own website, perhaps with some  
value-added services, bearing in mind that the ASF license requires you  
to link back to us as the originators of the code.

Basically, Daffodil becomes Apache Daffodil, and it is up to you to  
build a business model around this publicly available ASF project, but  
the ASF will not serve as a "" entity alongside your  
"". I hope I'm making myself clear here. You *will* be  
relinquishing control up to the level that you carefully need to check  
whether this is what you want.

Another common issue is the inclusion of non-ASL licensed dependencies.  
The ASF currently has a policy of not redistributing LGPL/GPL-licensed  
code. Does your project depends on such code? Also, is there any way to  
assess what you are planning to donate?

Lastly, I would seriously recommend you to approach the  
project as well, which might help you to recruit some sponsors and/or  
interested developers.


Steven Noels                  
Outerthought - Open Source Java & XML            An Orixo Member
Read my weblog at  
stevenn at                stevenn at

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message