[1064] in BarnOwl Developers
Re: Releasing BarnOwl
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Nelson Elhage)
Thu Oct 29 18:12:38 2009
Resent-From: nelhage@mit.edu
Resent-To: barnowl-dev-mtg@charon.mit.edu
X-Original-To: nelhage@nelhage.com
Date: Fri, 23 May 2008 22:00:44 -0400
From: Nelson Elhage <nelhage@MIT.EDU>
To: barnowl-dev@mit.edu
In-Reply-To: <20080515184719.GD8761@mit.edu>
Apparently,
1) owl has been removed from lenny due to build failures:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=476013
2) If we want barnowl to make it into lenny, we have well under a
month, and should in fact act as soon as possible.
In light of this, I'm going to step up my plans to get barnowl
uploaded to Debian, and ideally try to make an initial upload happen
within the next week.
- Nelson
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 02:47:19PM -0400, Nelson Elhage wrote:
> Hey all,
>
> I'm no longer hosed, so I'm going to be trying to throw some more
> cycles at barnowl.
>
> One of the things I'd like to do with BarnOwl this summer is to start
> releasing it to the outside world. This includes, primarily, getting
> it into Debian (and probably other package management systems), and
> making the source code and downloads easily available outside of
> MIT. Sam has agreed to maintain a Debian package, and says he should
> hopefully have cycles starting mid-June or so.
>
> For the most part, this is easy, but there are a couple of things I
> think should happen in the process:
>
> * Move to a real version scheme
> I think I want to basically arbitrarily declare a "1.0", and go from
> there. I think counting versions from where owl left off is pointless
> and confusing; We are decidedly a distinct project at this point.
>
> * Make the source code publically accessible
> The easiest way to do this is probably to run our own Apache on
> scripts with mod_dav, like scripts themselves do, and several other
> projects. However, there's been some talk of moving to git, in which
> case getting world read access is as simple as making HTTP access
> available; World write access would probably require running
> something on scripts
>
> * Clean up license and copyright notices in the source
>
> owl is licensed under the Sleepycat License, as far as I can tell,
> which is GPL
> compatible. (http://opensource.org/licenses/sleepycat.php). We can
> stick with that, but I think I would prefer to move to MIT or BSD,
> or probably even GPLv2, assuming kretch is OK with this.
>
> - Nelson
