Colm MacCarthaigh wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 19, 2007 at 12:16:03PM -0400, Jim Jagielski wrote: > > Colm MacCarthaigh wrote: > > > Like I said, as long as ApacheLounge makes clear that the versions it > > > carries are not ASF releases, it's certainly permitted by the license > > > and not the least bit out of the ordinary. > > > > That's the point, isn't it?? > > Yes! And I think they should make it more clear :-) But I don't think we > should be requesting them not to make RC tarballs or arbitrary checkouts > from svn available, that's their choice. I think it's a bad idea for > them, but ultimately their own problem. On principle I think it's wrong > for us to request them not to - it's at odds with the OSI definition of > open-source for one thing. >
As long as they don't call it Apache 2.2.5 or mislead people into thinking it is, I tend to agree. I think the point is that there are people out there right now running what they think is Apache 2.2.5 when, in fact, there is no such thing... -- =========================================================================== Jim Jagielski [|] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [|] http://www.jaguNET.com/ "If you can dodge a wrench, you can dodge a ball."
