| Summary: | [PATCH] New testcases for Contrib code, plus some new code | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | POI | Reporter: | Eric Pugh <epugh> |
| Component: | HSSF | Assignee: | POI Developers List <dev> |
| Status: | RESOLVED WONTFIX | ||
| Severity: | normal | ||
| Priority: | P3 | ||
| Version: | 3.0-dev | ||
| Target Milestone: | --- | ||
| Hardware: | Other | ||
| OS: | other | ||
| Attachments: | Patch file for contrib code | ||
|
Description
Eric Pugh
2003-07-18 09:58:29 UTC
Created attachment 7368 [details]
Patch file for contrib code
Not to be a pain, but I really need the code in this patch.. Did I forget to do something to get this patch accepted? my main concern is whether this code was "lifted" from an LGPL library. Please send this in: http://jakarta.apache.org/site/agreement.html that will make my concern go away. When you said that it scared me.. I read it as "I could just violate the copyright of the library and jeoporidize the POI project entirely". Though I'm sure thats not what you meant... It is just a big hashtable but I'm not a lawyer so when legal notices are put in code, etc...I start wanting to delegate things up. I have faxed in my Contributor License Agreement, so that should ameliorate any concerns you have. I think this code should pass licensing "muster". Thanks for the prod to get that CLA in... Eric Pugh Andy, if you are happy with the documentation, i'll apply this? Pls confirm! I asked the jakarta PMC for guidence... No reply. I'm on the fence.. . If he lifted the code, the ASF could be sued. The ASF could sue him but I really don't want it to come to that. Lets vote on this. I don't want to make the decision alone. It may be my responsibility but I'm on the fence and its our project. Call a vote. Maybe we can vote on something important to distract us from the unimportant. Yeah, could do, but am not sure any of us are equiped to make an informed decision on this.... so i am on the fence too... So its kind of falling back into Eric's court... Make us feel real comfortable that there are no legal issues with this code or petition pmc@jakarta.apache.org or board@apache.org to take action. Or propose a vote on the poi-dev list. Otherwise I guess avik and I are inadvertantly pocket vetoing this patch. (not by intent but by uncertainty) I am thinking about breaking this patch up into two pieces. One would be the non controversial code, basically testcases for existing code. To be honest, I may just ditch the whole code bit for converting html to unicode. In retrospect, A) it may not really belong in POI. B) the licensing issues/FUD are too much of a pain. If you all agree that it really insn't very POI specific code, but a helper that could belong elsewhere, then is the right thing to deprecate the method, and maybe put a note about contacting me for the code if you need some? If you agree with this approach of breaking up the code, should I submit a fresh patch? Or just add another patch file to this one? I do want to get it off the list of bugs for POI! Eric Yeah, i think splitting this up is a good idea. Would you please add another patch to this bug.. i'll add it in asap. Looks like HSSFCellUtil has survived a long time without these HTLM entity translations. Or maybe the FUD won out. |