Fine with me. On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 5:13 PM, Michael MacFadden < [email protected]> wrote:
> I think we have reached a consensus on the clean check in approach. We > should be able to mention that we have decided on the approach in the > report. Should we also set a target date for doing the migration? I am > more than happy to do the migration. I think we should give ourselves 2 > weeks to actually move the code over, just to be safe. This way we can > discuss any organization or structural issues that may come up. > > If we have a method and a date, then I think we have a good plan to put in > the board report. > > ~Michael > > > On Sep 12, 2011, at 2:58 PM, Upayavira wrote: > > > > > > > On Monday, September 12, 2011 1:12 PM, "Jasper Horn" > > <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Upayavira wrote: > >>> Right, the source code is the project's most valuable possession. The > >>> ASF as a charitable organisation exists to produce software, therefore > >>> it must be in control of its main asset, the asset it exists to create! > >> > >> Talk about "control", "possessions" and "assets" doesn't sound much > >> like Open Source to me... > > > > All software is owned (with the exception of public domain). Open source > > software makes strong use of copyright law, which is all about > > 'ownership'. Open source isn't about ownership, it is about licensing. > > Apache 'owns' the code (actually, owns the copyright on the collection, > > that is made up of individual parts which are owned by the respective > > authors), but then, in keeping with its non-profit mission, it makes > > that code available with a very liberal license to anyone who wants to > > use it. > > > > As a part of that, people have come to trust Apache software, and that > > needs some protecting - making sure that we keep to an approach that is > > worthy of that trust. So yes, Apache does protect its code. Apache does > > protect its trademarks. It is all Apache exists for. It protects its > > code and the methods used to create it so that it *can* make it > > available to the public, for no charge. > > > >>> There's scope to host code on git on Apache infrastructure, but that > >>> requires volunteers to assist with a deployment. > >> > >> What would need to be done? > > > > You can join the [email protected] mailing list and ask there. I'm > > not so sure about all the details. But bear in mind that the kind of > > install that Apache needs is more substantial than most. It needs a > > workflow that effectively tracks code's origins (SVN does this well, > > with git, as I understand it, there are ways to work around this). But, > > to be honest, I'm not sure what the current road blocks are other than > > volunteer time. > > > > Upayavira > >
