> they include runtime dependencies (via Maven2) on LGPL code.
Sorry, I think I just misunderstood your scenario. If it's just runtime linked to a LGPL project then all is fine and you can have your stuff ALv2. But there are other projects around which will need to use GPL I fear :/ > Super +1000. That's what I'm rapidly realizing. Why the heck did we > associate ourselves with Apache Extras if it's just Google Code? Basically I like the apacheextras idea, but it _must_ be made clear that apacheextras has it's own rules which are _not_ ASF business. The current http://apacheextras.org is really bad in this regard, because it's just a redirect to google.code showing a plain page with a few projects listed on it. LieGrue, strub ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Mattmann, Chris A (388J)" <chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov> > To: "dev@community.apache.org" <dev@community.apache.org>; Mark Struberg > <strub...@yahoo.de> > Cc: > Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 9:36 PM > Subject: Re: Apache Extras Question > > Hi Mark, > > On Dec 29, 2011, at 12:23 PM, Mark Struberg wrote: > >>> If you are saying this is compatible with ALv2 ? Then why use Apache >>> Extras instead of just the oodt SVN official repo in Apache ? >> >> But that's exactly the point! It is NOT ALv2 because it seems that > Chris' project compiles against GPL sources and thus also must be GPL > licensed. > > Yeah I wasn't sure of that. I would say my 4 Java files are ALv2 licensed, > but that > they include runtime dependencies (via Maven2) on LGPL code. I'm not a > license expert, but > I thought that would be OK. I know you have a TON of open source legal > knowledge > and have respected your opinion on it for a while so you tell me. > >> >> Would it be possible to have it under the package org.apacheextras ? > > Yeah I thought about that too. I'd be ~ok with that compromise but still > question what we are doing if our own PMCs can't start up a project on > Apache Extras and use org.apache.* as a namespace. > >> If we don't even allow that, then we can just close down > apacheextras.org - because then there is no use for it imo. > > Super +1000. That's what I'm rapidly realizing. Why the heck did we > associate > ourselves with Apache Extras if it's just Google Code? > > I'd go further and say if my 2 concrete proposals are shut down I'll > likely > just take the oodt-pushpull-plugins project down, throw it up on Github or > something > under my personal account, change the namespaces to something nice and > snarky like org.apacheextrassucks.anotherapacheprojecttogit.* *grin* > >> >> Of course this all implies that apacheextras will make a prominent > mentioning that apacheextras != ASF and apacheextras might not only contain > ALv2 > licensed sources but also others. > > Yeah, precisely. Thanks for getting what I was saying Mark! > > Cheers, > Chris > >> >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: Luciano Resende <luckbr1...@gmail.com> >>> To: dev@community.apache.org >>> Cc: >>> Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 9:13 PM >>> Subject: Re: Apache Extras Question >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Mattmann, Chris A (388J) >>> <chris.a.mattm...@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote: >>>> (removing community@ from the CC list; aren't we trying to kill > that >>> thread?) >>>> >>>> Hi Ross, >>>> >>>> Thanks for replying. Comments below: >>>> >>>> On Dec 29, 2011, at 11:04 AM, Ross Gardler wrote: >>>> [...snip...] >>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> It's my understanding that anyone can start up a > project at >>> Apache Extras, >>>>>> in which case, if that person doesn't have an availid > here at >>> the ASF, and >>>>>> doesn't have an ICLA on file, then that's another >>> situation that I won't >>>>>> speculate on. What I'm much more interested in is in > the >>> situation I presented >>>>>> within this thread. I have an availid. I am an ASF member. > I was >>> looking >>>>>> at Apache Extras as a place to share some Apache OODT > plugins that >>>>>> leverage code that is LGPL licensed, that I couldn't > otherwise >>> share within >>>>>> the normal Apache OODT SVN home. Prior to me coming to > Apache >>> Extras, >>>>>> this has been code housed in an internal JPL SVN repository > for >>> years, even >>>>>> before we brought the software to Apache. I'd like to > use >>> Apache Extras to >>>>>> facilitate sharing with an even broader community and to > share the >>> plugins >>>>>> we've developed (which themselves are ALv2 licensed) > with >>> others. >>>>> >>>>> The ASF does not release code under any license other than the > Apache >>> license, >>>> >>>> Who asked to release the code? I just want an SVN to throw the code > up at. >>>> If you look at oodt-pushpull-plugins [1], the LICENSE.txt file is > ALv2. The >>> code >>>> we wrote (in Java) is ALv2. The code includes a runtime Maven2 > dependency >>>> on libraries that provide FTP protocol implementations (Ftp4Che [2] > and >>> JvFtp [3]) >>>> that are LGPL licensed. >>>> >>> >>> If you are saying this is compatible with ALv2 ? Then why use Apache >>> Extras instead of just the oodt SVN official repo in Apache ? >>> >>> -- >>> Luciano Resende >>> http://people.apache.org/~lresende >>> http://twitter.com/lresende1975 >>> http://lresende.blogspot.com/ >>> > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Chris Mattmann, Ph.D. > Senior Computer Scientist > NASA Jet Propulsion Laboratory Pasadena, CA 91109 USA > Office: 171-266B, Mailstop: 171-246 > Email: chris.a.mattm...@nasa.gov > WWW: http://sunset.usc.edu/~mattmann/ > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > Adjunct Assistant Professor, Computer Science Department > University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA 90089 USA > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ >