Re: References to "Apache OpenOffice"

[Dave Fisher]

Hi Nick,

I'm top posting because it is clear to me what is happening here:

(1) The Title of the AOO blog is "Apache OpenOffice (Incubating)"

(2) The Title of various blog entries includes the phrase "Apache OpenOffice", 
but not the phrase "Apache OpenOffice (incubating)".

I have the karma and will fix these blog entry titles except for the Japanese 
one, but I'm going to wait 24 hours.

Regards,
Dave

On Jun 23, 2012, at 12:03 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:

> @Nick,
> 
> Ross offered to come to the AOOi PPMC to fix it.  I'm not clear what the PPMC 
> has to do with it.
> 
> Specifically, @TheASF is not of AOOi PPMC origin.  The question is, who is 
> expected to do something about that and how is it to be communicated to them? 
>  Someone else is responsible for those tweets and their aggregation on the 
> ASF home page.
> 
> Also, you refer to a blog post by Rob Weir on his own site.  It is true that 
> Rob Weir is a member of the AOOi PPMC, but that blog site is not a product of 
> the AOOi PPMC and its aggregation into Roller is no different than the 
> aggregation of any Apache committer posts that a committer arranges to 
> include in the feed picked-up by Roller.  (I believe the PPMC did authorize 
> that "Get it Here" image and link to be used by sites that wanted to promote 
> the availability of the software.  If there should have been greater 
> formality before doing that, there are places to raise that specific problem.)
> 
> My concern is how to determine what the infractions are that someone can do 
> something about and also being clear who that someone is expected to be.  The 
> general claim just has us running around like headless chickens over on 
> ooo-dev.
> 
> - Dennis
> 
> PS: I'm now in time-penalty and will check back anon.
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: Nick Kew [mailto:n...@apache.org] 
> Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2012 11:38
> To: general@incubator.apache.org
> Subject: Re: References to "Apache OpenOffice"
> 
> 
> On 23 Jun 2012, at 18:48, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> 
>> Nick, the AOOi project does not write those tweets from @TheASF and they are 
>> not under AOOi control.  
>> 
>> Are these and blog text occurrences the ones that attracted your attention 
>> or are there others?
>> 
>> If you follow the links to the referenced blog posts you will see that the 
>> full term is used in the blog title.   E.g., 
>> .
> 
> So what appears on www.apache.org doesn't matter?
> 
> Nor what appears on planet.apache.org, featuring the article that first 
> struck me
> as using the name in a way I wouldn't expect when I read it in my feed reader:
> http://www.robweir.com/blog/2012/06/pache-openoffice-34-downloads.html
> 
>> Would it have been sufficient to add it in the title of the individual post, 
>> and in the first mention in the opening paragraph?
> 
> I should think so, but that's just me!
> 
>> How many times do you require that the qualifier be used to satisfy the 
>> requirement for identifying incubation as the origin of a release, an 
>> announcement, etc?
> 
> If the guidelines are unclear then maybe they need reviewing?
> I was just pointing out usage that seems at odds with my understanding
> of the incubator rules.
> 
> If a blog gets aggregated, then readers will see what appears in their
> aggregator, as I did.  That's without the context of the page title in your 
> link!
> 
> -- 
> Nick Kew
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> 
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: References to "Apache OpenOffice"

[drew]

On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 16:01 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 3:55 PM, drew  wrote:
> > On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 15:42 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> >> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 2:59 PM, drew  wrote:
> >> > On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 19:43 +0100, Nick Kew wrote:
> >> >> On 23 Jun 2012, at 19:37, Nick Kew wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > Nor what appears on planet.apache.org, featuring the article that 
> >> >> > first struck me
> >> >> > as using the name in a way I wouldn't expect when I read it in my 
> >> >> > feed reader:
> >> >> > http://www.robweir.com/blog/2012/06/pache-openoffice-34-downloads.html
> >> >>
> >> >> Following that link in a browser I see there's also a nice but 
> >> >> questionable logo:
> >> >> http://www.robweir.com/blog/images/get-aoo-300x100-cf.png
> >> >> If PR are OK with that then fine, but I find it surprising.
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
> >> With reference to the Podling Branding Guide [1] , the requirement is
> >> that the product be called "Apache OpenOffice".  That is the name.
> >> Nothing else.  But we're also required to "mention that the project is
> >> under Incubation".  There is more than one way of doing that.  Also,
> >> "These statements only need to be disclosed upon the first reference
> >> in a document."  IMHO, we've done that for the blog posts as hosted on
> >> ASF servers.  But it is not clear if or how we control other parties
> >> tweeting links.  But I assume if someone feels strongly about
> >> controlling things at that level they will propose a way.
> >>
> >> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/branding.html
> >>
> >>
> >> > hmm - I suppose you are correct, it shouldn't have the feather and
> >> > should have the incubator tab - right?
> >> >
> >>
> >> Actually, we did approve that logo as a PPMC as part of a download
> >> promotion program:
> >>
> >> http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/get-it-here.html
> >>
> >> We ran that by VP Branding as well.  I could be wrong, but my
> >> impression was he approved as well.
> >
> > So what, it is still wrong and I can fix it easy enough.
> >
> 
> There is more than one way to make it right, so it might be worth a
> quick discuss on ooo-dev.
> 
> Or if you are in a JFDI mood, the live copy is here:
> 
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/site/trunk/content/openofficeorg/images/get-it-here/en.png


Ok - well, I still have the original SVG file on disk, so I'll work with
that - I'll put, as always, a link to the oo-dev ML with the draft
change. 

Off to fire up the editor, see you back at oo-dev.

TTFN,

//drew

> 
> Regards,
> 
> -Rob
> 
> >
> >>
> >> The PPMC does not control the Apache.org home page.  If the ASF
> >> decides to aggregate posts from the committers planet, then maybe that
> >> should come with a disclaimer?  Or bring in just the project blogs,
> >> not the committer blogs?  I could be talking about anything on my
> >> blog: OpenOffice, beer. satantic rituals, bagpipes, perhaps all at
> >> once.   It probably should not automatically all be promoted to the
> >> ASF home page.
> >>
> >> As for the project blogs, maybe we should just enhance the aggregator
> >> logic on the ASF home page?  For example, Google+ gets does it well,
> >> pulling in the blog title along with the post title.  Se here:
> >> https://plus.google.com/u/0/114598373874764163668/posts/ZiRcwog5cDJ  .
> >>
> >> If you try to fix it in the content itself, then you end up with
> >> suboptimal results for Google+ and other places that do bring the blog
> >> title along, ending up with something like "5 Million Downloads of
> >> Apache OpenOffice (incubating) : Apache OpenOffice (incubating)" which
> >> looks sloppy.
> >>
> >> -Rob
> >>
> >> > //drew
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > -
> >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> >> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >> >
> >>
> >> -
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> 
> 



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: References to "Apache OpenOffice"

[Rob Weir]

On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 3:55 PM, drew  wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 15:42 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
>> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 2:59 PM, drew  wrote:
>> > On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 19:43 +0100, Nick Kew wrote:
>> >> On 23 Jun 2012, at 19:37, Nick Kew wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > Nor what appears on planet.apache.org, featuring the article that first 
>> >> > struck me
>> >> > as using the name in a way I wouldn't expect when I read it in my feed 
>> >> > reader:
>> >> > http://www.robweir.com/blog/2012/06/pache-openoffice-34-downloads.html
>> >>
>> >> Following that link in a browser I see there's also a nice but 
>> >> questionable logo:
>> >> http://www.robweir.com/blog/images/get-aoo-300x100-cf.png
>> >> If PR are OK with that then fine, but I find it surprising.
>> >>
>> >
>>
>> With reference to the Podling Branding Guide [1] , the requirement is
>> that the product be called "Apache OpenOffice".  That is the name.
>> Nothing else.  But we're also required to "mention that the project is
>> under Incubation".  There is more than one way of doing that.  Also,
>> "These statements only need to be disclosed upon the first reference
>> in a document."  IMHO, we've done that for the blog posts as hosted on
>> ASF servers.  But it is not clear if or how we control other parties
>> tweeting links.  But I assume if someone feels strongly about
>> controlling things at that level they will propose a way.
>>
>> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/branding.html
>>
>>
>> > hmm - I suppose you are correct, it shouldn't have the feather and
>> > should have the incubator tab - right?
>> >
>>
>> Actually, we did approve that logo as a PPMC as part of a download
>> promotion program:
>>
>> http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/get-it-here.html
>>
>> We ran that by VP Branding as well.  I could be wrong, but my
>> impression was he approved as well.
>
> So what, it is still wrong and I can fix it easy enough.
>

There is more than one way to make it right, so it might be worth a
quick discuss on ooo-dev.

Or if you are in a JFDI mood, the live copy is here:

https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/ooo/site/trunk/content/openofficeorg/images/get-it-here/en.png

Regards,

-Rob

>
>>
>> The PPMC does not control the Apache.org home page.  If the ASF
>> decides to aggregate posts from the committers planet, then maybe that
>> should come with a disclaimer?  Or bring in just the project blogs,
>> not the committer blogs?  I could be talking about anything on my
>> blog: OpenOffice, beer. satantic rituals, bagpipes, perhaps all at
>> once.   It probably should not automatically all be promoted to the
>> ASF home page.
>>
>> As for the project blogs, maybe we should just enhance the aggregator
>> logic on the ASF home page?  For example, Google+ gets does it well,
>> pulling in the blog title along with the post title.  Se here:
>> https://plus.google.com/u/0/114598373874764163668/posts/ZiRcwog5cDJ  .
>>
>> If you try to fix it in the content itself, then you end up with
>> suboptimal results for Google+ and other places that do bring the blog
>> title along, ending up with something like "5 Million Downloads of
>> Apache OpenOffice (incubating) : Apache OpenOffice (incubating)" which
>> looks sloppy.
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>> > //drew
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > -
>> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>> >
>>
>> -
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>>
>>
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: References to "Apache OpenOffice"

[drew]

On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 15:42 -0400, Rob Weir wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 2:59 PM, drew  wrote:
> > On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 19:43 +0100, Nick Kew wrote:
> >> On 23 Jun 2012, at 19:37, Nick Kew wrote:
> >>
> >> > Nor what appears on planet.apache.org, featuring the article that first 
> >> > struck me
> >> > as using the name in a way I wouldn't expect when I read it in my feed 
> >> > reader:
> >> > http://www.robweir.com/blog/2012/06/pache-openoffice-34-downloads.html
> >>
> >> Following that link in a browser I see there's also a nice but 
> >> questionable logo:
> >> http://www.robweir.com/blog/images/get-aoo-300x100-cf.png
> >> If PR are OK with that then fine, but I find it surprising.
> >>
> >
> 
> With reference to the Podling Branding Guide [1] , the requirement is
> that the product be called "Apache OpenOffice".  That is the name.
> Nothing else.  But we're also required to "mention that the project is
> under Incubation".  There is more than one way of doing that.  Also,
> "These statements only need to be disclosed upon the first reference
> in a document."  IMHO, we've done that for the blog posts as hosted on
> ASF servers.  But it is not clear if or how we control other parties
> tweeting links.  But I assume if someone feels strongly about
> controlling things at that level they will propose a way.
> 
> [1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/branding.html
> 
> 
> > hmm - I suppose you are correct, it shouldn't have the feather and
> > should have the incubator tab - right?
> >
> 
> Actually, we did approve that logo as a PPMC as part of a download
> promotion program:
> 
> http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/get-it-here.html
> 
> We ran that by VP Branding as well.  I could be wrong, but my
> impression was he approved as well.

So what, it is still wrong and I can fix it easy enough.


> 
> The PPMC does not control the Apache.org home page.  If the ASF
> decides to aggregate posts from the committers planet, then maybe that
> should come with a disclaimer?  Or bring in just the project blogs,
> not the committer blogs?  I could be talking about anything on my
> blog: OpenOffice, beer. satantic rituals, bagpipes, perhaps all at
> once.   It probably should not automatically all be promoted to the
> ASF home page.
> 
> As for the project blogs, maybe we should just enhance the aggregator
> logic on the ASF home page?  For example, Google+ gets does it well,
> pulling in the blog title along with the post title.  Se here:
> https://plus.google.com/u/0/114598373874764163668/posts/ZiRcwog5cDJ  .
> 
> If you try to fix it in the content itself, then you end up with
> suboptimal results for Google+ and other places that do bring the blog
> title along, ending up with something like "5 Million Downloads of
> Apache OpenOffice (incubating) : Apache OpenOffice (incubating)" which
> looks sloppy.
> 
> -Rob
> 
> > //drew
> >
> >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> >
> 
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
> 
> 



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: References to "Apache OpenOffice"

[Rob Weir]

On Sat, Jun 23, 2012 at 2:59 PM, drew  wrote:
> On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 19:43 +0100, Nick Kew wrote:
>> On 23 Jun 2012, at 19:37, Nick Kew wrote:
>>
>> > Nor what appears on planet.apache.org, featuring the article that first 
>> > struck me
>> > as using the name in a way I wouldn't expect when I read it in my feed 
>> > reader:
>> > http://www.robweir.com/blog/2012/06/pache-openoffice-34-downloads.html
>>
>> Following that link in a browser I see there's also a nice but questionable 
>> logo:
>> http://www.robweir.com/blog/images/get-aoo-300x100-cf.png
>> If PR are OK with that then fine, but I find it surprising.
>>
>

With reference to the Podling Branding Guide [1] , the requirement is
that the product be called "Apache OpenOffice".  That is the name.
Nothing else.  But we're also required to "mention that the project is
under Incubation".  There is more than one way of doing that.  Also,
"These statements only need to be disclosed upon the first reference
in a document."  IMHO, we've done that for the blog posts as hosted on
ASF servers.  But it is not clear if or how we control other parties
tweeting links.  But I assume if someone feels strongly about
controlling things at that level they will propose a way.

[1] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/branding.html


> hmm - I suppose you are correct, it shouldn't have the feather and
> should have the incubator tab - right?
>

Actually, we did approve that logo as a PPMC as part of a download
promotion program:

http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/get-it-here.html

We ran that by VP Branding as well.  I could be wrong, but my
impression was he approved as well.

The PPMC does not control the Apache.org home page.  If the ASF
decides to aggregate posts from the committers planet, then maybe that
should come with a disclaimer?  Or bring in just the project blogs,
not the committer blogs?  I could be talking about anything on my
blog: OpenOffice, beer. satantic rituals, bagpipes, perhaps all at
once.   It probably should not automatically all be promoted to the
ASF home page.

As for the project blogs, maybe we should just enhance the aggregator
logic on the ASF home page?  For example, Google+ gets does it well,
pulling in the blog title along with the post title.  Se here:
https://plus.google.com/u/0/114598373874764163668/posts/ZiRcwog5cDJ  .

If you try to fix it in the content itself, then you end up with
suboptimal results for Google+ and other places that do bring the blog
title along, ending up with something like "5 Million Downloads of
Apache OpenOffice (incubating) : Apache OpenOffice (incubating)" which
looks sloppy.

-Rob

> //drew
>
>
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

RE: References to "Apache OpenOffice"

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

@Nick,

Ross offered to come to the AOOi PPMC to fix it.  I'm not clear what the PPMC 
has to do with it.

Specifically, @TheASF is not of AOOi PPMC origin.  The question is, who is 
expected to do something about that and how is it to be communicated to them?  
Someone else is responsible for those tweets and their aggregation on the ASF 
home page.

Also, you refer to a blog post by Rob Weir on his own site.  It is true that 
Rob Weir is a member of the AOOi PPMC, but that blog site is not a product of 
the AOOi PPMC and its aggregation into Roller is no different than the 
aggregation of any Apache committer posts that a committer arranges to include 
in the feed picked-up by Roller.  (I believe the PPMC did authorize that "Get 
it Here" image and link to be used by sites that wanted to promote the 
availability of the software.  If there should have been greater formality 
before doing that, there are places to raise that specific problem.)

My concern is how to determine what the infractions are that someone can do 
something about and also being clear who that someone is expected to be.  The 
general claim just has us running around like headless chickens over on ooo-dev.

 - Dennis

PS: I'm now in time-penalty and will check back anon.

-Original Message-
From: Nick Kew [mailto:n...@apache.org] 
Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2012 11:38
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: References to "Apache OpenOffice"


On 23 Jun 2012, at 18:48, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:

> Nick, the AOOi project does not write those tweets from @TheASF and they are 
> not under AOOi control.  
> 
> Are these and blog text occurrences the ones that attracted your attention or 
> are there others?
> 
> If you follow the links to the referenced blog posts you will see that the 
> full term is used in the blog title.   E.g., 
> .

So what appears on www.apache.org doesn't matter?

Nor what appears on planet.apache.org, featuring the article that first struck 
me
as using the name in a way I wouldn't expect when I read it in my feed reader:
http://www.robweir.com/blog/2012/06/pache-openoffice-34-downloads.html

> Would it have been sufficient to add it in the title of the individual post, 
> and in the first mention in the opening paragraph?

I should think so, but that's just me!

> How many times do you require that the qualifier be used to satisfy the 
> requirement for identifying incubation as the origin of a release, an 
> announcement, etc?

If the guidelines are unclear then maybe they need reviewing?
I was just pointing out usage that seems at odds with my understanding
of the incubator rules.

If a blog gets aggregated, then readers will see what appears in their
aggregator, as I did.  That's without the context of the page title in your 
link!

-- 
Nick Kew
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: References to "Apache OpenOffice"

[drew]

On Sat, 2012-06-23 at 19:43 +0100, Nick Kew wrote:
> On 23 Jun 2012, at 19:37, Nick Kew wrote:
> 
> > Nor what appears on planet.apache.org, featuring the article that first 
> > struck me
> > as using the name in a way I wouldn't expect when I read it in my feed 
> > reader:
> > http://www.robweir.com/blog/2012/06/pache-openoffice-34-downloads.html
> 
> Following that link in a browser I see there's also a nice but questionable 
> logo:
> http://www.robweir.com/blog/images/get-aoo-300x100-cf.png
> If PR are OK with that then fine, but I find it surprising.
> 

hmm - I suppose you are correct, it shouldn't have the feather and
should have the incubator tab - right?

//drew



-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: References to "Apache OpenOffice"

[Nick Kew]

On 23 Jun 2012, at 19:37, Nick Kew wrote:

> Nor what appears on planet.apache.org, featuring the article that first 
> struck me
> as using the name in a way I wouldn't expect when I read it in my feed reader:
> http://www.robweir.com/blog/2012/06/pache-openoffice-34-downloads.html

Following that link in a browser I see there's also a nice but questionable 
logo:
http://www.robweir.com/blog/images/get-aoo-300x100-cf.png
If PR are OK with that then fine, but I find it surprising.

-- 
Nick Kew
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: References to "Apache OpenOffice"

[Nick Kew]

On 23 Jun 2012, at 18:48, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:

> Nick, the AOOi project does not write those tweets from @TheASF and they are 
> not under AOOi control.  
> 
> Are these and blog text occurrences the ones that attracted your attention or 
> are there others?
> 
> If you follow the links to the referenced blog posts you will see that the 
> full term is used in the blog title.   E.g., 
> .

So what appears on www.apache.org doesn't matter?

Nor what appears on planet.apache.org, featuring the article that first struck 
me
as using the name in a way I wouldn't expect when I read it in my feed reader:
http://www.robweir.com/blog/2012/06/pache-openoffice-34-downloads.html

> Would it have been sufficient to add it in the title of the individual post, 
> and in the first mention in the opening paragraph?

I should think so, but that's just me!

> How many times do you require that the qualifier be used to satisfy the 
> requirement for identifying incubation as the origin of a release, an 
> announcement, etc?

If the guidelines are unclear then maybe they need reviewing?
I was just pointing out usage that seems at odds with my understanding
of the incubator rules.

If a blog gets aggregated, then readers will see what appears in their
aggregator, as I did.  That's without the context of the page title in your 
link!

-- 
Nick Kew
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

RE: References to "Apache OpenOffice"

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

Nick, the AOOi project does not write those tweets from @TheASF and they are 
not under AOOi control.  

Are these and blog text occurrences the ones that attracted your attention or 
are there others?

If you follow the links to the referenced blog posts you will see that the full 
term is used in the blog title.   E.g., 
.

Would it have been sufficient to add it in the title of the individual post, 
and in the first mention in the opening paragraph?

How many times do you require that the qualifier be used to satisfy the 
requirement for identifying incubation as the origin of a release, an 
announcement, etc?

 - Dennis



-Original Message-
From: Nick Kew [mailto:n...@apache.org] 
Sent: Saturday, June 23, 2012 00:24
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: References to "Apache OpenOffice"


On 23 Jun 2012, at 06:47, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:

> If you identified the public places and were more specific about it, it would 
> help us to clean it up as appropriate.

In fact the word pair "Apache OpenOffice" appears no fewer than three times
on the front page www.apache.org at this moment.  None of those three are
qualified with any hint at its incubating status.

-- 
Nick Kew
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org

Re: [VOTE] Release Kafka 0.7.1-incubating (Candidate 3)

[Kevan Miller]

On Jun 22, 2012, at 6:16 PM, Chris Douglas wrote:

> Kevan-

Hi Chris,
Thanks for elaborating. 

> 
> Please appreciate that there is universal agreement that (1) listing
> and maintaining all transitive dependencies and licenses is a sound
> service

It's more than "sound". We are required to meet the terms and conditions of the 
source/binary artifacts. IIRC, Marvin stated this pretty well...

> and (2) listing all dependencies distributed with source code
> carry legal requirements w.r.t. the LICENSE and NOTICE files. We
> disagree only on (3) the scope of legally required attribution extends
> to the transitive closure of dependencies.

I wasn't aware of a disagreement on transitive closure. I thought your position 
was that "source-only" releases did not need to document their 
build-time/distribution licensing. 

I'll attempt to elaborate, the case for Kafka:

1) Kafka source contains some ALv2 and non-AL v2 licensed stuff (let's avoid 
the question of binary vs. source)
2) Kafka source declares some dependencies on binary artifacts
3) These direct dependencies have additional transitive dependencies (in this 
case, declared via pom.xml, the precise mechanics don't matter)…

Kafka's LICENSE/NOTICE files document the licensing of the source code. Many 
projects document their source and binary dependencies in the LICENSE/NOTICE 
files in the root directory of their source. Some projects have separate source 
and binary licenses. There may be some room for interpretation, here, along 
with some old-school/new-school thinking.

Some transitive dependencies are compile/test-time only. We don't care about 
these. We care about the run-time dependencies. Moreover we only care about the 
run-time dependencies that we bundle.

If Kafka only produced individual jar files (and not a runtiime environment), 
things would be different. If you only produced jar files, you would need 
license/notice files in your source and to produce jar files with 
license/notice files in the META-INF directory. These jar files may have 
run-time dependencies and these dependencies may be encoded in some meta-data 
(e.g. pom.xml). We don't care about these dependencies. The META-INF/LICENSE 
(NOTICE) need only document the licensing of the source that produced the 
contents of the jar file. 

In the jar-only case, you aren't bundling the dependencies of your jars. 
Someone else will be. And IMO, they would be responsible for the licensing of 
whatever bundling they create. Just because a pom.xml file declares transitive 
dependencies, doesn't mean that the bundler has to use these dependencies. The 
bundler may replace with their own preferred artifacts with their own licensing 
(an behavior, of course). 

If Kafka was a jar-only project, we'd be basically done (though I've noted that 
you aren't producing jar files with META-INF/LICENSE and NOTICE). That's a 
"new" requirement, I wouldn't necessarily demand that in a 0.7.1 release. But 
would look for it in the future.

Kafka is more than a jar-only project. Kafka is designed to create a messaging 
server. Kafka builds kafka source into jar files, packages dependencies 
(direct/transitive), contains shell scripts to launch a Kafka messaging server, 
etc… If you or anyone else on the project disagrees with this, then let's 
discuss...

So, Kafka is required to create the LICENSE/NOTICE files for the the Kafka 
messaging server that your project is constructing. The LICENSE/NOTICE files 
must describe all artifacts contained within the Kafka messaging server. Direct 
or transitive dependencies don't matter. What matters is the contents of the 
Kafka messaging server.

> 
> Now, a group of us believe that we investigated this thoroughly in the
> Kafka 0.7.0 release and- based on its approval- we are exercising the
> same procedure to release 0.7.1. If you believe this is mistaken, you
> can either go to the trouble to obtain clarification from board@,
> legal@, or find a reference that supports your position. Presented
> with that evidence, I would reverse my vote. Alternatively, if you
> believe the work is important enough regardless of policy, then do it.
> The project would be grateful to receive that contribution. -C

Thanks. Though I'm interested in the Kafka project from several technical 
aspects, I just don't have time to participate. Plus, I'm also interested in 
seeing the project undertake their ASF responsibilities.

So, here's my attempt at documenting what's required of the project…

Apache releases are described here:
http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#what

All PMCs must approve their releases as described here:
http://www.apache.org/dev/release.html#approving-a-release

As described in the above -- "Before voting +1 PMC members are required to 
download the signed source code package, compile it as provided, and test the 
resulting executable on their own platform, along with also verifying that the 
package contains the required contents."

Required contents

Re: References to "Apache OpenOffice"

[Ross Gardler]

Thanks Nick, I'll pick it up with the PPMC.

Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity.
On Jun 23, 2012 8:24 AM, "Nick Kew"  wrote:

>
> On 23 Jun 2012, at 06:47, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
>
> > If you identified the public places and were more specific about it, it
> would help us to clean it up as appropriate.
>
> In fact the word pair "Apache OpenOffice" appears no fewer than three times
> on the front page www.apache.org at this moment.  None of those three are
> qualified with any hint at its incubating status.
>
> --
> Nick Kew
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
>

Re: References to "Apache OpenOffice"

[Nick Kew]

On 23 Jun 2012, at 06:47, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:

> If you identified the public places and were more specific about it, it would 
> help us to clean it up as appropriate.

In fact the word pair "Apache OpenOffice" appears no fewer than three times
on the front page www.apache.org at this moment.  None of those three are
qualified with any hint at its incubating status.

-- 
Nick Kew
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org