I agree to have all of my contributions re-licensed as EPL
Mark Phippard wrote:
> I have had a lot of off-line conversations with Brock and a few others
> about submitting a proposal to Eclipse to create an SVN Team Provider
> based on Subclipse. At the time, I was not sure if I was going to be able
> to devote the time required to create the proposal and lead the effort and
> no one else has come forward to do so. Things have changed for the better
> for me, so I can now safely do this and would like to.
>
> I think one of the strengths of Subclipse is our community and the diverse
> group of individuals that have made contributions. Subclipse is not the
> result of the effort of one person or one company. I would like to
> continue this tradition as we begin this process and do everything out in
> the open. When I have the proposal to a good enough stage to call it a
> rough draft I will commit it into our repository and post the URL and
> checkout information to this list. That way it will be easier to work on
> this proposal in a collaborative manner.
>
> In the meantime it would be useful to know who would like to participate
> in this project and be listed in the proposal? Myself, and some of my
> coworkers that have contributed behind the scenes will be listed. Brock
> has agreed to be listed. What about others? Martin, Eugene, Johan,
> others? This would be a good time for all with interest to come forward.
>
> Another issue is going to be the license. We will need to get approval
> from everyone that has contributed code to have their code re-licensed
> under the EPL. The EPL is virtually identical to the CPL license we use
> for Subclipse, and is very similar in intent to the Apache license we use
> in svnClientAdapter. So I am not anticipating any difficulties in this
> area. If you have contributed code to this project, it would be helpful
> if you send an email to the list stating your
> approval/disapproval/concerns about this. The mailing list can then serve
> as a record of your intent.
>
> Aside from all of this, I will also be interested in your comments about
> this. I know a lot of people will be in favor of it, but if you have
> concerns, please share them. Subclipse has become very stable and I think
> the list of things we need or would like to do has become small and
> manageable enough that this is the right time to do this. I did not want
> to do this before we got past the 1.0 stage because I did not want to
> divert that process. We have now given our users a stable and
> feature-rich release, and are close to releasing a second major release
> aimed at Eclipse 3.2. So this is probably a point in time where we can
> afford to spend refactoring package and class names and dealing with
> license issues.
>
> Thanks
>
> Mark
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subclipse.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subclipse.tigris.org
>
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subclipse.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subclipse.tigris.org
Received on Mon Jul 3 11:59:10 2006