This is all very unpleasant. I read all the emails and I just wanted to drop a note, that I am happy to ask our JS developers (at sum.cumo) if they want to help rewrite Fauxton. We have a lot of experience with vue.js but I am sure, we could also help with other libraries and parts in Fauxton.
All the best Andy -- Andy Wenk Hamburg - Germany RockIt! GPG public key: http://pgp.mit.edu/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0x45D3565377F93D29 > On 19. Aug 2017, at 15:44, Jan Lehnardt <j...@apache.org> wrote: > >> >> On 19. Aug 2017, at 12:50, Jan Lehnardt <j...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> Thanks for getting the ball rolling Joan, >> >> If you are interested in the licensing/policy details, I’ve summed things up >> on my blog: >> http://writing.jan.io/2017/08/19/understanding-the-facebook-vs-asf-license-kerfuffle.html >> — if you want to comment on this, please start a new thread, or email me >> privately. This thread is only for what we do next with Fauxton. >> >> * * * >> >> To take a bit of pressure out of this decision making process, I want to >> bring up an option that unblocks us indefinitely for making new releases at >> the expense of end-user experience. >> >> It’s a little bit of work, but not as much as anything approaching a rewrite. >> >> 1. move apache-fauxton to its own GitHub organisation outside of the ASF >> (we can always re-integrate it later) >> 2. publish release builds as tarballs somewhere on the web. >> 3. replace /_utils in CouchDB with a custom route that displays a simple web >> ui with a button “install Fauxton” that goes away once Fauxton is installed, >> that then fetches a Fauxton release tarball from outside the ASF and >> installs it on the user system. >> >> There is some infrastructure work to be done, and the added inconvenience >> for our end-users is not something I’d like to keep up for long. >> >> But should we decide to take this option (or one like it), it would allow us >> to not have to rush with a Fauxton adaptation, or be blocked on releases, or >> have no admin UI in a release. >> >> * * * >> >> Garren has already done some experiments with preact[1] (a react-API >> compatible rendering library with a compatible license) and has a basic >> prototype running. Since we are also using additional React libraries that >> have no corresponding equivalent in preact-land, Garren expects to migration >> work to take 1-2 months of development time, something I’m not sure we are >> able to afford at this point. >> >> [1]: https://preactjs.com > > Small update: I’ve revisited the (private) discussion with Garren and the 1-2 > months estimate was for the react css animation library only. The other big > dependency with an incompatible license is flux which is being ported to > redux, but according to Garren is still “quite a bit of work”. No time > estimate attached. > > Apologies for the confusion. > > Best > Jan > -- > >> >> * * * >> >> Moving to a library that isn’t React-API compatible would be close to a >> complete Fauxton rewrite which would likely take years at our pace, and >> would break compatibility with downstream addons (that we know Cloudant are >> using). >> >> As such, my preference would be to stick with the React-API and find a >> minimal replacement for what we need. But I’d like to leave the final >> decision to the Fauxton team. >> >> * * * >> >> I’d be happy to help with a recruiting drive to get more folks helping to do >> the port. >> >> Best >> Jan >> — >> >> >> >> >> >>> On 19. Aug 2017, at 02:40, Joan Touzet <woh...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> Hello everyone, >>> >>> <Joan puts her Apache CouchDB PMC hat on> >>> >>> I have some difficult news to communicate. >>> >>> Those of you who are more tuned in to the JavaScript world will be aware >>> that the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) has placed the so-called "BSD >>> + Patents" license that Facebook uses in licensing some of its open >>> source technologies, such as the popular React library, into "Category >>> X." This means that we are no longer able to ship React in Apache >>> CouchDB, nor have it as a build dependency, after August 31, 2017. >>> >>> Subsequently, we asked Facebook if they would consider changing the >>> React license to avoid this conflict, as they chose to do for their >>> RocksDB database. About an hour ago, they publicly announced that this >>> would not be forthcoming: >>> >>> https://code.facebook.com/posts/112130496157735/explaining-react-s-license/ >>> >>> This means that we must replace the use of React in Fauxton completely >>> (with something like Vue or preact), and ship CouchDB without Fauxton >>> until the former can be completed (or simply not ship until the rewrite >>> is complete.) >>> >>> No one in the PMC is suggesting we remove Fauxton completely from >>> CouchDB either now or in the future - we consider our web UI a defining >>> feature of the product and would consider a Fauxton-less release of >>> CouchDB incomplete. >>> >>> I would like to open the discussion towards the Fauxton rewrite, and >>> specifically: >>> >>> * Which replacement library do we like the best? Why? >>> * Who is willing to step up to lead this change? >>> * Do you know any good JS devs willing to help us? >>> >>> Those who are interested in the reasons why this policy decision was >>> reached by the ASF are encouraged to read the following links: >>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-303 >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-319 >>> https://github.com/facebook/react/issues/10191 >>> >>> PLEASE do not devolve this thread into discussion about Facebook's >>> decision, or why the ASF has made the policy decision that they have; >>> such discussions lead nowhere, and CouchDB is not in a position to >>> influence either organisation to change their decisions. >>> >>> On behalf of the CouchDB PMC, >>> Joan Touzet >> >> -- >> Professional Support for Apache CouchDB: >> https://neighbourhood.ie/couchdb-support/ >> > > -- > Professional Support for Apache CouchDB: > https://neighbourhood.ie/couchdb-support/
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
