Dave Johnson wrote: > I think we had a little misunderstanding. Let's work it out.
No problem. I have no question that we're all trying to do the right thing and be reasonable in the process. :-) > 1) I can can continue to make NON ASF releases at Java.Net Sun can do what it wants with the code under the terms of the Apache License. However ... > It's my understanding that anybody can take code from the ASF > repositories and release it as an open source or commercial > product, under the terms of the ASL When I've raised this exact point in the past, there have been some comments from the Board that put project leaders in a special category, presumably to avoid them bypassing the ASF's release policies. > So I need to figure out how to do it without the impression > that a release is "official" ASF. I've asked Sam to please raise this issue with on Board and bring a consensus back to us. > http://www.rollerweblogger.org/page/roller?entry=roller_2_0_ea_standalone Appreciate the attempt. :-) > I'd really like to see the final Roller 2.0 release be an official ASF > release, under the rules of the incubator. What do we need to do to > make that happen? > Do we know the specific steps we must take to deal with > the LGPL issue? Personally, based upon what I am hearing regarding the legal issues, I would rather that we have a release using Incubation polices that clearly indicates the issue of having the dependency on the non-Apache license. But I'm not sure if we've complete resolved the policy, as opposed to legal, issues. > Can we resolve these by early October when Roller 2.0 will be ready? I certainly hope so. :-) --- Noel
