> From: Janne Jalkanen <[hidden email]>
> Date: July 28, 2008 8:35:28 AM PDT
> To: [hidden email] > Subject: Re: SVN move
> Reply-To: [hidden email] >
>>> So, to make this a little more clear, when Wicket performed a few
>>> releases on their old project site was their old Subversion
>>> shutdown and the ASF Subversion repository exclusively used?
>> Yes. We are volunteers. Having to maintain 2 repositories would have
>> been prohibitive. We made it absolutely clear that if we were not
>> to create releases from our code base, and had to maintain 2
>> repositories, we would not have joined Apache.
> I can also say the same for JSPWiki. Having to maintain two code
> repositories, two issue trackers and a total of four mailing lists
> would be too much of a pain. Both to developers and users.
> I don't think JSPWiki would've attempted Apache Incubation if that
> were a requirement.
>> Yes. When we imported our repository we included everything (full
>> history) from our old SVN repository.
> Ditto. The Incubation work has been concentrating on relicensing
> the code under AL 2.0, and learning the Apache ways of working. We
> release updates to the old releases using our own distribution
> mechanism (for the general user, there is no trace of Apache
> anywhere, except the fact that the issue tracker is on ASFs site,
> and so is the mailing list). However, this gives us a great way to
> practice the Apache way of working with minimal disruption to
> Since JSPWiki code has been under various versions of GPL since
> 2001, this relicensing stuff has taken quite a while, including
> pieces of code which needed to be completely rewritten from
> scratch. If that work had to be done in two repositories at the
> same time, we might as well have forgotten about it.
> It was clear from the beginning that the transition of a large
> project into Apache would not be easy or fast, especially since all
> of the committers are working on a volunteer basis. I find the
> Incubator to be an excellent "safe haven" where this work can be done.
>> Yes, but older versions are no longer maintained (we currently only
>> support ASF releases, provided there are no security issues).
> This is also our plan; there is no desire to continue maintenance of
> the LGPL-version of the code, once the ASF transition and incubation
> is complete.
> /Janne, who is sorry he can't contribute much to this conversation -
> I'm on holiday behind a slow cell connection...
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email] > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email] >