incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Stein <>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] IPMC votes on releases
Date Mon, 12 Aug 2019 00:46:11 GMT
On Sun, Aug 11, 2019 at 6:32 AM Justin Mclean <>

> Hi,
> > I see no problem with using our infrastructure to distribute F/OSS
> > materials. Why would the Foundation want to be against that? If it is
> > labeled properly, then ... roll with it.
> It often isn’t labelled properly.  There’s a reasonable risk that some of
> what would be placed there and distributed isn’t actually F/OSS.

And what would be the blowback of something on our server with incorrect
information? Very little. Mostly, we'd just move on. Maybe we delete it.

> I can point you to several example of this. I’m not sure how the incubator
> (or the board) would feel about that risk, so that would be something we
> would be need to consider further. Also

Welp. Then I will pose that question, rather than this endless
pontificating about "risk".

> while Jane and John may be fine with that, a lot of companies that use
> Apache releases may not be.

I already acknowledged that. Many people could use software regardless of
its licensing. The license typically only matters in *redistribution*
scenarios. Things like the AGPL affect *usage*, but that is very, very
atypical. I'd think 99% of downstream could use our software, even with
gummed-up licensing.

> > You're conflating *learning* with *releases*. These can be handled
> separately.
> How exactly?

You're saying that releases are the control point to learning. I say just
let the releases go.

You want to teach? Then you can use the releases like "that wasn't good.
next time: do A and B". Over time, releases will get fixed. But the IPMC
should not have to manage the releases.


  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message