On 12.01.2012 20:59, Pedro Giffuni wrote:
--- Gio 12/1/12, Rob Weir<robw...@apache.org> ha scritto:
...
If you look carefully, you'll see that SVN, via the website
stuff that is now there, has tons of content now that is in
incompatible licenses, in the form of GPL and other licensed
documentation. Ditto for the wiki. Ditto for extensions site.
These are all hosted by the Apache, on behalf of the project,
but they are not part of our releases. Are you saying SVN
must be cleaned of all of that, even if it is not part of our
releases?
I certainly had understood the policy for website, Wiki and
even the extensions site is that we shouldn't be hosting
copyleft content. There might be a transitory situation during
incubation and some things are still to be decided but even you
have clearly stood in the position where any new content in the
Wiki, etc should be under AL2.
I'm happy to have someone review the issue, if you can
state what the policy issue is. I simply don't see any
problem here. We're not including category-b source code
in our release, period.
I am really not going into this discussion with you again.
I think the issue is very easy to resolve: drop the
tarballs from SVN and provide sufficient instructions so
that the people doing the builds can download the tarballs
themselves: we even have nice "fetch_tarball.sh" script to
do just that.
I am not quite sure that I understand the problem here.
Would it be OK to move the category-b tar balls to eg SourceForge or
Google and just adapt the URL in the ooo.lst file?
-Andre
Pedro.
