incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Alan D. Cabrera" <>
Subject Re: SVN move
Date Mon, 28 Jul 2008 14:54:23 GMT

On Jul 26, 2008, at 10:55 AM, Roland Weber wrote:

> Hi Alan,
> see my 0.02€ below...
> Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>> On Jul 25, 2008, at 8:50 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>>> Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>>>> On Jul 25, 2008, at 7:38 PM, Craig L Russell wrote:
>>>>> Hi Alan,
>>>>> On Jul 25, 2008, at 3:31 PM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>>>>>> Some things to consider in this discussion:
>>>>>> - The 0.9.0 release cannot be performed off of the copy in ASF
>>>>>> - The 0.9.0 or earlier releases cannot be supported off of the  
>>>>>> copy in ASF
>>>>>> Maybe that's what everyone is thinking.  I just want to make  
>>>>>> sure that it's clear.
>>>>> I don't agree with either of the above opinions. We don't  
>>>>> restrict what people do with Apache code.
> +1, except for the minimal restrictions stated in the AL 2.0.
>>>>> I don't see anything wrong with publishing a release off the  
>>>>> artifacts stored in Apache. It cannot be called "an Apache  
>>>>> incubating release" but it can certainly be called JSecurity 0.9  
>>>>> whatever.
>>>>> Follow-on releases can similarly be built from code checked into  
>>>>> the Apache repository. They just cannot be called "Apache  
>>>>> anything". And if they're published in the  
>>>>> download area they can be maintained in the Apache repository.
> The last sentence confused me a bit. Whether or not a code branch
> is maintained in the Apache repo does not depend on where exactly
> releases are published. Non-Apache releases are not published from
> Apache servers. Code can be maintained in the Apache repo without
> being Apache-released: sandboxes, experimental branches,...

I think people are missing the point that I am trying to make and  
where Craig and I have different opinions.

I fully understand and support projects that are moving to the  
incubator to support old versions for their community.

Where I think that there is a problem is when they ditch their old  
infrastructure and exclusively use ASF's infrastructure to build,  
maintain, and release non-ASF releases.  To be sure in the case of  
JSecurity the final artifacts will not use the ASF mirrors but that  
does not  hide the fact that they intend to build and maintain non-ASF  
releases exclusively using our infrastructure.

Craig says that's fine.

I think that they should release and maintain their new and earlier  
non-ASF releases on the infrastructure that they currently have or  
else use ours and follow the ASF/Incubator guidelines.


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

View raw message