We should take history! A snapshot does not solve any "legal or social issues". Obscuring history does not change history and if code is a derivative of LGPL, then not having the history does not change that fact.
If there is something in the real history, then it is best to have that explicit in the svn history. regards Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > --On December 23, 2005 1:15:44 PM -0500 "Geir Magnusson Jr." > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Sorry to change the subject... >> >> Can someone make a definitive statement on whether or not code history >> is brought into our repo from elsewhere when a podling brings code over? > > > I say no. We should only take in a snapshot. > > If people want to see the history that was done elsewhere, they are free > to maintain the old history outside. What happened before the ASF was > involved is something we have no knowledge of and can't speak to. We > can't be responsible for what happened before we were involved. > > By only taking in a snapshot, we create a clean break from a social and > legal standpoint. All work from that point is done under our oversight > mechanisms. We can operate in good faith that the snapshot we receive > is in decent legal shape as we usually have a software grant for the > bulk of that work. However, taking in complete source history that we > have no knowledge of the oversight mechanisms that were in place is a > bad thing in my opinion. > > There is a lesser point that taking in the author information from a > separate project is awkward. This presents conflicts with our user > account information and muddy things up if we ever have to do an audit. > -- justin --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
