On Jul 17, 2011, at 9:08 AM, Benson Margulies wrote: >> >> I think you are going to have to. Mark isn't the only one who has expressed >> the sentiment. Some of the discussions I've seen on changing the >> relationship Maven has with repository managers would surely require changes >> at the Aether layer. > > I don't follow your last sentence. I just submitted a patch to Aether, > and it was cordially received, but there is, of course, no guarantee. > This thread started out as a discussion of licensing, not control. If > Sonatype put the dual license back today, there would be no vote > required to update to a new version of Aether, and mods to Aether > would still require cooperation with Sonatype.
There have been discussions regarding whether having a central repository is a good thing. With Aether as a separate project Maven itself can't really do much to change that. While you are correct that putting the dual license back wouldn't require a vote, what it would mean is that if someone decided to innovate and create a different way of doing things they could start with the existing Aether code base at any point in time. As it stands, they would either have to go back to the last point that Aether was under the Apache license, which becomes less and less possible as time goes on and changes are made, or convince the Aether community to incorporate their changes, which is probably a much harder sell then just changing Maven. I agree that I only see the 3 choices you presented and the most favorable would be to have Aether continue to be dual licensed. When it comes to which of the other 2 options are better than I see pluses and minuses on both sides. Ralph --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
