incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Justin Erenkrantz" <>
Subject Re: Podling Release Requirement (WAS: Re: [VOTE] Graduate Felix to TLP status)
Date Thu, 14 Sep 2006 08:23:26 GMT
On 9/13/06, Upayavira <> wrote:
> So how does Felix proceed now? Accept that the rules have just changed
> on it, after spending some months under the view that a release _wasn't_
> necessary to graduation, and go back and do something it would have done
> months ago had it not been told to do otherwise?

The issue, as I see it, is that the Incubator PMC is being asked to
certify that the Felix PPMC is able to manage itself as a top-level
project.  A critical activity of a PMC is to conduct a release.
Another point with conducting a release while in the Incubator is that
it generally flags any legal issues as people check it.  So when a
PPMC decides not to conduct a release and asks to graduate immediately
as a TLP, we needs to be doubly sure that the due diligence has been
completed.  Hence, it's fair to expect probing questions - especially
when the last status report indicated that a release was forthcoming.

First off, Felix doesn't seem to have a NOTICE or LICENSE files in its
trunk (hint: it's in the wrong directory and in the wrong format), nor
does Felix have the appropriate license blocks (hint: see

Based on a quick superficial glance, I also see files in the tree that
aren't ours, such as:

Yes, it's licensed under the ALv2, but AFAICT, there is no documented
provenance for these files: it bears a CVS tag and refers to the OSGi
Alliance as the copyright owner.  We should be citing that in the
LICENSE and NOTICE files.  Instead, all I see in FELIX-9
( is a discussion that
some code should be donated - no reference is made in the file or
commit message or JIRA as to where it came from.  It sounds like there
might be an IP clearance form on file somewhere if this code was
donated - then those copyright blocks can go away in favor of our
standard one.  If we don't have clearance, then we have to make sure
that we do not ever remove that license block in those files.  But, if
we make any changes to those files, then our license block needs to be
added as well.

It also seems that Felix has forked Tomcat's servlet code - which is okay:

However, the copyright years have been altered from the original file
- removing 2004 and adding 2005 - which isn't okay:

(Ideally, Felix should resync with Tomcat once they update their
license block to remove the copyright years; but Tomcat may not be
updating Servlet 2.3.  I'm unsure if an ASF project can relicense
forked code from another project - I'll ask on legal-discuss@...)

These instances cause my antennae to be raised to there being more
issues throughout the Felix codebase.  I don't believe these are
serious issues at all, but these are issues that must be cleaned up
before graduation should be considered.  (I don't have the time to do
a more thorough review: that's the job of the Felix PPMC.)

Finally, as Noel pointed out, we have not seen a proposed Felix PMC
roster or who the PMC chair will be.  The Board requires that before
even placing such an item on its agenda.

HTH.  -- justin

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

View raw message