Samul Kevin wrote:
2009/4/8 Bill Stoddard <[email protected]>
Samul Kevin wrote:
2009/4/8 Bertrand Delacretaz <[email protected]>
Hi,
On Tue, Apr 7, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Samul Kevin <[email protected]>
wrote:
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/April2009#preview...
It would be good, IMHO, to include some info about the community side
of things...a recent thread [1] seems to indicate that most of the
BlueSky committers are not working on the project anymore.
And the people who are now contributing to the project are not listed as
commiters. It does not matter. Though acting slowly, people are working.
I
am now more seriously concerned about the progress. I thought the
speeding
of podling would be fastened , however, it is still like turtle
crawling....in 1 and 3/4 month since the beginning of this semester. Yes,
things get a little better now. But i don't think it is good enough. We
have
reasons, as having classes or working on several projects simultaneously,
nevertheless, i don't think we can treat them as excuses to fend off not
doing THIS PROJECT good.
A critical milestone will be getting the code grant in place and checking
the code into svn. When the code is checked into svn, we can look for
contributors from outside the XJTU students and begin building a sustainable
community (I think we have some people in India interested in the project).
We simply have to begin releasing code from the ASF if the project is
ever to take the next step to sustainability. Samul, I will work with you
this week to do the next round of code review;
Here is the software grant that XJTU needs to submit for code developed by
XJTU: http://www.apache.org/licenses/software-grant.txt
Please review and begin preparing it.
ok, i will dig into it as soon as finish my coding work.
Now... I have a very difficult question to ask...
Bluesky project relies heavily on video technology, most of which is not
suitable for redistribution by the ASF (due to licensing terms and
condition). The team has made a great effort over the past year to scrub
the project clean of incompatibly licensed code, but is it enough? My
concern is that the project will never be able to resolve the difficulties
around the licensing of the video technologies... and that maybe the ASF is
not the best home for Bluesky for this reason.
yes, the critical part of Bluesky system is video and audio tech. Surely we
can't us FFmpeg, but at least we could try to find a suitalbe replacement
which in my opinion, there is chance that this problem could be solved.
My question... can we really succeed in realizing the goals of the bluesky
project under the license and legal constraints imposed by the ASF? Is it
really possible?
i talked to a friend today. And she analized me as a man who has good
traits except self-confidence. she thought that I always think about the
worst part so that i am used to be hesitating on doing things. Though i am
gradually change this defect these days, no shame to say, i guest it
contributes most in my not finding a girlfriend-_-!.
i assume to complete this project as to hitch a girl who you love but
pretty hard to chase. there are two way beyond, get drunk (countless wine
for triumph)or get fucked (lose like hell). Actually, like many people, i
didn't anticipate the success of this project at first. But gradually, i
found that there is chance we could make it if we sacrifice time to
contribute. The chance might be tiny if you chase the girl while it is
naught if you just bury the love in the bottom of your heart. Even if the
projcet fail at last, i want a decent end after my toiling days and hours.
Where there is a will, there is a way. To my understanding, the future of
podling of Bluesky lies on the will of us -- participators of this project.
If we were all determined, i don't believe we could not success. I throw the
same question to my companions, since we've started it, how could end it?
sucessfully, decently or shamely.
^_^
My concern is not with the team... my concern is with the technology, or
to be precise, my concern is with the licensing of the technology. The
ASF places restrictions on what kind of software licenses we can use.
Can we find suitable alternatives to the GPL components Bluesky relies
on? I am waiting on the team to tell me. If the answer is no, then we
have to face up to reality... there is no shame in admitting defeat if
there are forces beyond our control guiding our choices. We can move
the project to a different venue (sourceforge maybe?) and distribute
Bluesky as GPL code? I don't want to admit defeat just yet... I hope
the team can solve the problem... but if solving the problem means
reinventing ffmpeg, with a different license, then we really cannot
succeed, can we? What other alternatives do we have?
Bill
