Thanks Alex, Tony,

Now I better understand, make sense.

Thanks for the explanation.

Best

Gabriele

Il giorno ven 4 lug 2025 alle ore 16:08 Alex Porcelli <[email protected]> ha
scritto:

> The code in question, specifically the YARD runtime, has a development
> history dating back to June 2022, which predates the migration of the
> codebase to the Apache Software Foundation. During that migration,
> other parts of the same effort, such as the YARD tooling, were brought
> into the KIE Tools repository, which is already under the ASF. This
> suggests the YARD runtime was part of the broader initiative and was
> overlooked during the move.
>
> By recognizing and incorporating it now, we establish consistency in
> the codebase and eliminate ambiguity regarding ownership. Treating
> this code as ASF property aligns it with related components that are
> already within the foundation, helping us reduce risk, not increase
> it.
>
> Leaving it outside ASF, despite its connection to existing ASF-hosted
> code, could raise concerns about unclear ownership, especially as
> development continues and the code gains visibility. This is where
> potential legal concerns could arise, particularly regarding
> trademarks or misperceptions about what is or is not part of ASF.
>
> For context, the PMC plays a crucial role in monitoring and
> safeguarding the use of trademarks and ensuring the integrity of ASF
> projects. These responsibilities are outlined in more detail here:
> - https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/responsibility.html
> - https://www.apache.org/foundation/marks/
>
> I think my suggestion aligns with that spirit: to ensure proper
> attribution by treating the code as a missing piece of the original
> migration.
>
> -
> Alex
>
> On Fri, Jul 4, 2025 at 9:57 AM Gabriele Cardosi
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > HI Alex, thanks for your explanation.
> > Could you please help me understand better what you mean with:
> > "This helps prevent potential legal concerns related to
> > ownership, trademarks, and similar issues."
> >
> > The reason I'm asking is because, reading your explanation, my conclusion
> > would be exactly the other way around, so the above is the actual
> > discrimination.
> >
> > Thanks
> >
> > Best regards
> >
> > Gabriele
> >
> >
> > Il giorno ven 4 lug 2025 alle ore 15:42 Alex Porcelli <[email protected]>
> ha
> > scritto:
> >
> > > Thank you, Gabriele, for engaging and helping to evaluate the overall
> > > situation.
> > >
> > > Based on the repository history, with commits dating back to June
> > > 2022, this piece of code was likely overlooked during the migration to
> > > Apache. This seems plausible, given that other components, such as the
> > > YARD tooling, have already been moved into the KIE Tools repository.
> > > The available evidence suggests this code is effectively part of what
> > > should now be considered Apache Software Foundation property.
> > >
> > > Regarding the future of this component, we can reassess its value and
> > > determine whether to evolve it or remove it. However, for now, I
> > > recommend we treat it as an overlooked part of the original codebase
> > > migration. This helps prevent potential legal concerns related to
> > > ownership, trademarks, and similar issues.
> > >
> > > -
> > > Alex
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jul 4, 2025 at 9:28 AM Gabriele Cardosi
> > > <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hi Tony, many thanks for your answers, make sense!
> > > >
> > > > The only thing probably I've not been very clear about is the
> "driver" or
> > > > business value, or whatever.
> > > >
> > > > I understand that currently the implementation is targeting
> scorecard,
> > > but
> > > > my question was about the "need" of this other implementation, since,
> > > IINW,
> > > > we already have a couple of them, or more, around (I may be wrong on
> > > that,
> > > > of course).
> > > >
> > > > Am I clear ? Does this make sense ?
> > > >
> > > > And, my personal POV, I would prefer to not include something that,
> > > > eventually, would need to be removed, since, as we all know, removing
> > > stuff
> > > > is much harder than introducing them, for different reasons....
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Il giorno ven 4 lug 2025 alle ore 15:19 Toni Rikkola <
> [email protected]
> > > >
> > > > ha scritto:
> > > >
> > > > > Thank you for interest. Like I said this is a separate module that
> is
> > > easy
> > > > > to pick out if needed later.
> > > > >
> > > > > 1.
> > > > > Yes this is another way for defining and grouping rules.
> > > > >
> > > > > 2.
> > > > > org.kie.j2cl is actually something I need to remove. It comes from
> our
> > > > > j2cl dependencies that are mainly used by tooling. It will be
> replaced
> > > with
> > > > > pure Java approach. This is was used so that the
> model-to-YAML-to-model
> > > > > functionality could be the same and reused in the J2CL client side.
> > > > >
> > > > > 3.
> > > > > Right now the driver is scorecards, but this can also be used for
> data
> > > > > aggregation. In the simple cases it could be merging one or more
> > > YAML/JSON
> > > > > files to a new file using rule logic.
> > > > >
> > > > > This is right now on alpha stage and for that reason experimental.
> This
> > > > > does mean that in case it is not useful in future use the bar to
> > > remove it
> > > > > should be low.
> > > > >
> > > > > Toni
> > > > >
> > > > > On 2025/07/04 12:47:47 Gabriele Cardosi wrote:
> > > > > > Hi Tony,
> > > > > > this seems an interesting feature, indeed.
> > > > > > Anyway, as I mentioned in the past for other similar
> improvements, I
> > > > > think
> > > > > > the main concern should be the evaluation of pros/cons, since we
> are
> > > > > > already struggling to maintain the codebase as it is and this new
> > > > > > implementation, inevitably, would increase the surface.
> > > > > > First of all I'm looking at the code here [1], and I take for
> granted
> > > > > that
> > > > > > all that code would be incorporated inside the drools repository:
> > > please
> > > > > > correct me if I'm wrong.
> > > > > > 1. IIUC, this is first of all another way to define rules to be
> > > invoked
> > > > > by
> > > > > > the rule engine: is that true, or the execution is delegated to a
> > > > > > completely different engine ?
> > > > > > 2. I see dependencies like -> org.kie.j2cl.tools; I have no idea
> > > what's
> > > > > > inside, but the name suggest something on the tool/ui side (j2cl,
> > > tools)
> > > > > > and, if that is true, such kind of dependencies should not get
> in the
> > > > > > "backend" side
> > > > > > 3. What is the concrete driver for this initiative? I mean, what
> use
> > > > > > case/issue currently exists that would be solved by that
> > > implementation ?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Beside minor technical issues or doubts, the main problem from my
> > > POV is
> > > > > in
> > > > > > the overall approach we have to our codebase after the Apache
> > > migration.
> > > > > > For different reasons, we have to be extremely careful about the
> > > > > stability
> > > > > > and maintenance of our projects, and indeed we should start
> removing
> > > > > > dead/unused/unmaintained code for our sake.
> > > > > > So, I think we should have a sort of "experimental" or similar
> branch
> > > > > > (unfortunately, "incubator" name has already been taken), so
> that on
> > > one
> > > > > > side we may promote innovation, as this proposal seems to point
> to,
> > > but
> > > > > on
> > > > > > the other side without increasing the burden of maintain the code
> > > with
> > > > > > something that is not necessary.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I want to enforce the point that I have nothing against the idea
> by
> > > > > itself,
> > > > > > but I'm only concerned about our overall context.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Many thanks
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Gabriele
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----
> > > > > > 1 https://github.com/kubesmarts/yard
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Il giorno ven 4 lug 2025 alle ore 14:19 Toni Rikkola <
> > > [email protected]
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ha scritto:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Summary:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > When we moved to KIE, YARD was still in experimental mode. We
> did
> > > move
> > > > > > > the editors and validation tooling (in kie-tools ATM), but
> runtime
> > > was
> > > > > > > left behind. I previously proposed adding YARD in, but it was
> seen
> > > as a
> > > > > > > risk for the up coming releases.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Assignee: Me, Toni Rikkola
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Target Release: ASAP
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Scope:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > This will go into the incubator-kie-drools repository as a
> > > separated
> > > > > > > unit. No dependencies to any other part of KIE will be added.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Description:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > YARD. Yet Another Rule Definition is best explained in the
> > > README.MD
> > > > > > > with pictures. It is a work in progress project where the
> current
> > > main
> > > > > > > driver is the decision table feature.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > https://github.com/kubesmarts/yard
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Testing: Unit tests. Human validation is not relevant at this
> point
> > > > > > > since the project is in Alpha stage.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Dependencies: Drools
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thank you
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Toni Rikkola
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > >
> > >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>

Reply via email to