Hi all,

so I just replied sort of in your favor on the list and I hope I'll be able to 
vote today or tomorrow.

However I would like to point out a few things:

a) Justin is generally right about what he said.
b) I think especially for a first release of an incubating project I would have 
let this slip. I think the potential danger is minimal.

However please consider: Wayang is currently in incubation. This is a phase in 
whch young projects are trained to be able to do releases on their own, while 
respecting the rules.

From what I looked at: It is clear that the code for initializing the 
datastructure was taken and then some node-names were updated. I mean ... the 
structure of the line-lengths is just identical. Even if the graph resulting is 
different, it's about the source and you can clearly see the process, that 
created the results.

So in general, this is something you should never do: Copy something from one 
place and update a few variable-names, formatting whatsoever. 

I know in this case it's trivial, but still ... I would like you folks to keep 
that in mind for the future. Even if some things might be common practice in 
general, at Apache we are bound to applying to the rules. On the one side this 
might suck and have us have to go an extra mile, but on the other side we are 
therefore absulutely safe from any form of legal attack. And our users value 
that by this they too are protected by this.

Just imagine in another case, we would be confronted with a legal attack 
because of this. This would result in us having to take action. Action that 
results in a new release (if we are able to do so). And this will result in our 
users having to adjust their soltions to this new version. We don't want this 
and if this would happen too often, Apache would loose it's A++++ credibility. 

So don't let yourself be discouraged and most of all, don't see Justin as 
someone just wanting to bug you. He is a good teacher. Sometimes perhaps not 
the most empathic one, but I think he's doing an outstanding job. After all ... 
he found a lot of things, that I didn't see when I did my checks and indeed - 
if I had seen the original ones, I probably would have reacted similarly. 

So instead of continuing this discussion, I think it would be and would have 
been a lot shorter and involved a lot less work, if we simply whiped up a 
completely new (perhaps random) graph and used that instead. Then there would 
have been no discussion at all. 

I mean ... this is your first release and if you address this last issue, I 
think you would be able to do your first Apache release starting with the 
non-WIP disclaimer. This not something every project is able to do. It's a bit 
like jumping right into High-School and you should be prowd of that.

Chris





-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: bertty contreras <[email protected]> 
Gesendet: Sonntag, 7. November 2021 16:58
An: [email protected]
Cc: Alexander Alten <[email protected]>
Betreff: Re: License discussion on incubator list

Hi Roman,

The original issue is that we use the image [1] as input source to perform the 
test[2], however, the copied part is the transcription of the image to the 
representation in the code. When Justin spot the issue with the Wikipedia 
license, we change the graph and we through that changing the graph content it 
was enough. Do you think we need to change the representation or part of the 
code to look different from the original code?

[1]
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/PageRank#/media/File%3APageRanks-Example.svg

[2]
https://github.com/apache/incubator-wayang/commit/aaa47e07d762ddc838e5ba52cc7af7727e1b821a


On Sun 7. Nov 2021 at 14:53, Roman Shaposhnik <[email protected]> wrote:

> Can I please get "before" and "after" picture of the offending materials?
>
> Thanks,
> Roman.
>
> On Sun, Nov 7, 2021 at 1:49 PM Alexander Alten <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Roman,
> >
> > Can you please have a look at:
> >
> https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/202111.mbo
> x/browser
> >
> > and advise?
> >
> > We’d need some legal clarity, which is important for the project and 
> > the
> incubation process.
> >
> > Thank you, stay safe,
> >  —Alex
>

Reply via email to