I am fine with relicensing as well and you can list me as a potential
contributor.
regards,
Eugene
Martin Letenay wrote:
> I agree with re-licensing of anything I've submitted.
>
> I hope I'll have again enough time to contribute, so you can list me in the
> proposal too.
>
> +1 for the re-licensing/refactoring tasks.
>
> Martin
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Mark Phippard [mailto:markp@softlanding.com]
>> Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 6:41 PM
>> To: dev@subclipse.tigris.org
>> Subject: [Subclipse-dev] Submitting Subclipse as project to Eclipse.org
>>
>> 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
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subclipse.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subclipse.tigris.org
Received on Mon Jul 3 15:08:46 2006