If existing committers are willing to take on the project, and
maintain it and really own it (so, more than just being a proxy for
external committers), I'd be on board accepting it as a sub-project.
However, if its just going to be an orphaned project, or we're just
going to have to act as a proxy for external developers who've hosted
their code in our project as a notional parent, but aren't committers
themselves, I'm opposed to importing it and assuming ownership of it
as a sub-project, and think it would be better served hosted where the
originating developers can maintain it.
In either case, I think it's a great related project to serve both the
R and Accumulo communities, and we should link to it, provide
feedback, and help make it better if we can. I'm just concerned about
setting a precedent for accepting/hosting everything related to
Accumulo, causing us to either be spread too thin or to cause projects
to die because of lack of care.
Christopher L Tubbs II
On Wed, Oct 30, 2013 at 5:48 PM, Josh Elser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/29/13, 4:20 PM, Eric Whyne wrote:
>> Some thoughts to re-ignite this thread:
>> The raccumulo project has some of it's code written in the language R, but
>> does not borrow any code from the R codebase and as such is not a
>> derivative work.
>> Unless anybody can think of a way in which R's own licensing could become
>> concern, potential license conflicts might be a dead issue?
> Looking around at this some more, I can't find any similar case on LEGAL.
> Given that there is only a GPL implementation of R (take openjdk, sun/oracle
> jdk, IBM's java, etc as an example for Java projects), I wasn't sure if this
> would present any sort of issue because raccumulo would be more or less
> useless if someone did not want to use GPL software.
> <not-a-lawyer>Nothing is jumping out at me from a licensing standpoint that
> would create concern to this code being hosted on ASF resources.
>> The primary developer Phil Grim has signed an ICLA that I'm going to send
>> off tomorrow pending our company's contracts department's approval. Same
>> with company level CCLA, complete and pending final review. Phil, Aaron,
>> and Myself as listed as representatives on it.
>> Insofar as observations about lack of committership:
>> Phil has been willing to share his code for a while and wants to keep
>> discussion about this topic here:
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg10665.html
>> The other developer, Aaron is listed as a previous contributor to
>> More about what's going on at the company:
>> More about DARPA XData (one of the programs of interest):
>> The customer project includes a charter to contribute to open source:
>> "XDATA plans to release open-source software toolkits to enable
>> collaboration among the applied mathematics, computer science and data
>> visualization communities."
>> As a company we'd be happy to just keep hosting the code on our Github
>> page, but I think we'd rather see it be included closer to the accumulo
>> project as mentioned previously. Given the momentum of R, the interest of
>> DARPA and others, I think the benefits outweigh he risks. There's an
>> extremely small chance of an orphaned project and even then as a 200+
>> person company there's somebody you can blame if it does become a problem.
>> We have a twitter account and github page people can go to with help
>> requests or fixes.
> (treating "you" as all of those who might be involved in raccumulo whom you
> mentioned, Eric)
> Personally, I wouldn't mind seeing raccumulo as a sub-project of Accumulo.
> If those who are going to maintain it want to step up and do things "The