incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Dave Fisher <>
Subject Re: [IMPORTANT] Board proposal on podling releases
Date Fri, 14 Jun 2019 15:16:01 GMT
Hi Greg,

I agree. A pragmatic, incremental, trust in a community’s best intentions is all we should

To me the minimum requirements are:

(1) License is AL v2.
(2) Disclaimer is standard. I don’t want it to vary because then we’ll discuss correctness.
(3) Signature.
(4) Checksum.

The rest is up to the podling community to grow more towards policy than away. Treating it
as an existential crisis is in conflict with “Community over Code” and turns into a form
of “filibustering”.

Users who are vested in a podling’s “correctness” and graduation should join and “scratch
their itch.”


Sent from my iPhone

> On Jun 14, 2019, at 3:48 AM, Greg Stein <> wrote:
>> On Thu, Jun 13, 2019, 18:57 Justin Mclean <> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>> Boring imo. You have to try hard to screw up Cat B (though I’ve seen it
>>> done).
>> Really? Category B source code is generally not allowed in sources
>> releases. It's actually Category X. Category B as image and the like is
>> allowed.
> And if it appears in a tarball... So what happens?
> Really. Answer that. (licenses for each piece of work get sorted)
> We are getting all twisted up in nonsense. Make some podling releases, and
> improve them each time. Nothing more than that .
>> I mean clearly against the terms and intention. i.e. I’m less cut up if a
>>> 3rd party project did a crap job of their attribution such that we had to
>>> fix their problems in obeying their license. GPL, MPL can happily be
>>> included; it breaks our policy not their license.
>> Well if you include GPL (and this has happened), you need to abide by
>> terms of it license, claiming it's ALv2 doesn’t really do that.
> So what? Think on it: what is *really* going on? Various bits of code under
> different licensed. That is all.
> Whatever mislabel occurs, doesn't change the underlying licenses. So
> despite the furor, there isn't a problem.
> We claim ALv2 on the larger work/distribution. We do not override license
> claims on pieces within that distro.
> -g

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

View raw message