[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       cassandra-dev
Subject:    Re: Binary release artifacts (or What a User Wants)
From:       Jesse McConnell <jesse.mcconnell () gmail ! com>
Date:       2010-03-19 21:44:09
Message-ID: a43524d01003191444s382e30c4ucda1ca33e9995502 () mail ! gmail ! com
[Download RAW message or body]

>> yes, and my point is that if there is any question in your guys minds
>> on if it is allowed or not that is an issue for apache legal (via
>> jira) for a definitive answer
>>
>>
>
> so.. if you have a question for them.. go ping them.. no need anyone else to
> paraphrase it.. just go ahead and ask.
>

I think I was misunderstood, if so I am sorry...

to me this thread originates from developers of cassandra not clear on
what they can and can't do for distribution for cassandra releases (or
at least what they would need to do) and soliciting feedback on what
users want.

my feedback as a user of cassandra was that I think the idea of having
to install ant and use ivy to make a cassandra distribution usable is
hinky at best

my feedback as an apache committer and having dealt with a mess of
this licensing goop was that if the developers of cassandra have any
questions on what they can and can't do then they need to ask apache
legal

fwiw, I think Erik is completely correct in his thinking that they
aren't able to redistribute the ivy-retrieve goop without declaring
it.  its not like you could use gpl dependencies and just call it good
by running ant to download it after you installed your app and before
it was run.  I am sure some of the dependencies in question are
required to operate since I have had to bring them in to run cassandra
embedded...so I don't even know that the release process currently in
place is allowed but that is the PMC's responsibility to make sure
they follow apache policy, if they feel they are, great!

cheers!
jesse
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]