It's not really a problem to have Apache projects depending on other external projects, especially when they are under ASL. I don't think there is any legal issues here.
On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 12:05 PM, Alin Dreghiciu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > With Pax Logging this is a non issue but with other projects as Pax > Web we have to sort out what we are doing with the artifacts that pax > web (or other projects we are moving) depends on. > For example Pax Web depends on ops4j base and ops4j pax swissbox. > There are some solutions as: > 1. move also those projects to felix > 2. include what is needed from those projects in pax web > 3. new Felix HttpService based on Pax Web depends on ops4j projects > > For me 1 looks like not in the line of only moving the implementation, > 2 seems like a lot of maintenance work regarding later on eventual > merges from Pax Web to Felix f in Pax Web we still keep those projects > as dependencies, so 3 looks like the most viable option but I do not > know if Apache projects can depend on non Apache projects. > > Alin Dreghiciu > > On Mon, Jun 2, 2008 at 11:06 AM, Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> On Monday 02 June 2008 15:17, Niklas Gustavsson wrote: >>> +1 (non-binding, hoping for more to come) >>> >> >> Since there is a lot of overlap between Felix and Pax projects, both in terms >> of people as well as codebases, the two communities have discussed this back >> and forth for a long time. >> >> I think the consensus is roughly like this; >> >> * For codebases that implements official OSGi specifications, it belongs >> in Felix. >> >> * For codebases that benefit from a Open Participation policy, it belongs >> in OPS4J. >> >> >> The first is pretty straight forward. >> The second part is perhaps less obvious. OPS4J has a "No barrier" policy, in >> principle "Wiki brought to Coding", "Don't send us the patch, commit it and >> we'll take a look at it." approach. This seems to work very well, especially >> for code that is not central enough for someone to have a keen interest to >> maintain it on a daily basis. >> >> Pax will remain its "platform neutrality" identity, and Pax Logging will be >> released under its current name, and possibly independent of Felix release >> cycles, for this purpose. >> >> >> In the near future, Pax Web will also be donated, as it is an implementation >> of the OSGi Log Service spec. >> >> I don't have much expectations of codebases "re-locating" from Felix to the >> Pax project on the basis of the above, other than individuals outside the >> Felix project grabbing the sources and continue to evolve at OPS4J. If/when >> that happens we can discuss this matter further. >> >> >> Cheers >> -- >> Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer >> >> I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er >> I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc >> I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug >> > > > > -- > Alin Dreghiciu > http://www.ops4j.org - New Energy for OSS Communities - Open > Participation Software. > http://www.qi4j.org - New Energy for Java - Domain Driven Development. > http://malaysia.jayway.net - New Energy for Projects - Great People > working on Great Projects at Great Places > -- Cheers, Guillaume Nodet ------------------------ Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
