On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 14:36, Craig L Russell <Craig.Russell_at_sun.com> wrote:
> Hi Greg,
> On Nov 6, 2009, at 11:30 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 14:21, Craig L Russell <Craig.Russell_at_sun.com>
>>> On Nov 6, 2009, at 10:43 AM, Greg Stein wrote:
>>>> But with all that said, how about we do this: we'll do a 1.6.7 release
>>>> from the 1.6.x branch after we do the code import. That release will
>>>> be performed by svncorp (we don't want to touch every file on that
>>>> branch to relicense it, and to switch file headers). The release
>>>> process can be followed/tracked by the Incubator PMC. I'll make sure
>>>> to relay pointers to all relevant threads as the release is performed.
>>> I don't think that releasing svn by svncorp without any Apache license
>>> proves anything except that they can make a release after moving the
>>> repository. So if it makes anyone happy, fine. But it's not an Apache
>>> I'd be interested in seeing a release after it's been licensed to Apache
>>> has all of the Apache license, notice, and packaging.
>> It already has the Apache License (v2), and it uses a NOTICE file (per
>> the license), and our packaging is tighter/stronger than typical
>> Apache releases (per Justin's note). Are there other items to an
>> "Apache release" that are needed to demonstrate that the svn project
>> understands the proper release process?
> I guess I don't understand your comment here:
>>>> (we don't want to touch every file on that
>>>> branch to relicense it, and to switch file headers).
> That sounds like your plan is to relicense, or am I misreading you?
All of the existing tags/branches of svn use a tweaked Apache Software
License, v1.1, and generally have a file header claims a copyright by
trunk is licensed under Apache License, v2, and has a file header as
defined by the Apache Legal Affairs Committee, though with SVNCorp
rather than ASF as the rights-holder to the distribution. After we
import the codebase, we intend to tweak all of the file headers on
trunk with s/SVNCorp/ASF/.
Now... if we were to make a release from one of those branches, then I
believe we would need to relicense and rewrite all of their file
headers before making that release. That is a lot of disruption for
what is supposed to be a patch release.
The Subversion project has a policy to support the prior release, and
to provide security fixes for the release before that. Today, that is
1.6.x and 1.5.x, respectively. I honestly don't know how we're going
to make those point releases, but gotta believe there is existing
precedent. Right *now*, svncorp is still around and can make that
1.6.7 release. Six months from now? Dunno.
Does that clarify my message?
Received on 2009-11-06 20:44:58 CET