incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Niall Pemberton <>
Subject Re: svn status update (was: svn commit: r880911 [1/13] - in /subversion/trunk: ./ build/ build/generator/ build/win32/ notes/obliterate/ packages/python-windows/ packages/windows-WiX/BuildSubversion/ packages/windows-WiX/BuildSubversion/WixDialog/ pa
Date Fri, 20 Nov 2009 13:14:49 GMT
On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 7:13 PM, Branko Čibej <> wrote:
> Niall Pemberton wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Greg Stein <> wrote:
>>> fyi, Subversion has been migrated into the ASF repository. About 30+
>>> committers have access and are beginning work within the ASF repo.
>>> Below, you can see the big change to switch the licensing over to the
>>> ASF (we were already on ALv2, so this is merely a name change). Also,
>>> note the mailing lists are active. I declared "flag day" as 00:01 UTC
>>> Wednesday Nov 18 to switch to the lists (lazy
>>> consensus seems to approve). Please sign up as you will (all lists are
>>> open-subscription, but for private).
>>> Buildbot migration is now in-progress. I also expect some nightly
>>> builds to begin soon. At that point, we'll have tarballs if anybody
>>> would like to perform an audit. Hyrum has already fed some patches
>>> back to RAT to ease running RAT on release tarballs.
>> I ran a RAT report (0.6 version)  on subversion trunk but theres alot
>> of *noise* from it. I have opened a bug ticket for license header
>> review here:
>> It would make review easier if the files without headers had them
>> added. If thats considered a good idea, I'll try and help submitting
>> patches.
> I see the following in that ticket:
>    GPL -  Copyright Free Software Foundation, Inc.
>      build/config.guess
>      build/config.sub
>    ????? - Copyright X Consortium
>      build/install-sh
> I don't rightly know what to do about config.guess and config.sub;
> they're essential parts of the autoconf system, so we (currently) can't
> really build without them -- but their GPL does not affect the compiled
> code, so that should be OK. Note that at least APR has these two files,
> under the same license, in the same place in their tree.

Sorry I'm no expert on licensing. Might be worth asking the APR guys
or following up on the legal-discuss mailing list. If it is OK to
distribute then it might be that something just needs adding to the
LICENSE and/or NOTICE files - but I'm no expert on that. I submitted a
patch to add the ant build file that runs RAT, since it seems like a
good idea to build up and document the list of exclusions for these
kind of files that raise flags but or actually OK.

I also added the latest RAT report run against trunk to the ticket
(can't currently get hold of the nightly distros)


> For install-sh, we could probably replace it with APR's The
> latter is also based on the X consortium's original, but modified and
> mogrified, and it now says it's subject to the Apache license.
> I'm testing the Subversion build now to see if it works with APR's
>, and will switch over if everything appears to be OK.
> -- Brane
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

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

View raw message