You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@gbiv.com> on 2008/04/18 21:57:40 UTC
cut the crap
I've wasted too much time today on the stupid IP Clearance template
that insists on asking a bunch of irrelevant questions about
decisions that the Incubator is not responsible for making.
The required IP clearance questions should be:
Date:
Identify the Contribution:
Identify the Contributor(s):
What are the filenames for the applicable
software grant(s):
Corporate CLA(s):
Individual CLA(s):
Location of initial import:
Destination PMC:
That's it.
Licensing the artifacts, removal of dependencies, changing headers,
and checking for product trade names are all activities of the PMC
before a release is made, NOT before an import. Committer access
is a responsibility of the destination PMC. Prior distribution
rights are irrelevant. Where on earth did this crap come from?
The template reads like a friggin nanny's club treatise on the
correct angle to wipe one's ass. The only reason we have this
form is to record the connection between grant and initial commit.
Don't waste our time with anything else.
....Roy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: cut the crap
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> maybe the incubator doesn't need to check that a PMC is conducting
> it's affairs correctly. not clear how much oversight the board
> expects the incubator to perform for IP clearances.
IIRC, some but not extensive. Just check to make sure that the IP clearance
is filed properly.
> it's hard to target the audience correctly.
It was specifically intended to tell PMCs what was expected of them and how
to do it, since it is not assumed that they have a clue. Keeping in mind
that at the time, none of them had a clue that there was an issue, much less
how to handle the task, that's not unreasonable.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: cut the crap
Posted by Robert Burrell Donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 8:57 PM, Roy T. Fielding <fi...@gbiv.com> wrote:
> I've wasted too much time today on the stupid IP Clearance template
> that insists on asking a bunch of irrelevant questions about
> decisions that the Incubator is not responsible for making.
> The required IP clearance questions should be:
>
> Date:
> Identify the Contribution:
> Identify the Contributor(s):
> What are the filenames for the applicable
> software grant(s):
> Corporate CLA(s):
> Individual CLA(s):
> Location of initial import:
> Destination PMC:
>
> That's it.
pretty much agree
the VOTE link is useful but maybe the incubator doesn't need to check
that a PMC is conducting it's affairs correctly. not clear how much
oversight the board expects the incubator to perform for IP
clearances.
> Licensing the artifacts, removal of dependencies, changing headers,
> and checking for product trade names are all activities of the PMC
> before a release is made, NOT before an import. Committer access
> is a responsibility of the destination PMC. Prior distribution
> rights are irrelevant. Where on earth did this crap come from?
dunno. stuff only gets fixed once someone notices it's wrong. it's CTR
so feel free to remove the cruft.
> The template reads like a friggin nanny's club treatise on the
> correct angle to wipe one's ass. The only reason we have this
> form is to record the connection between grant and initial commit.
> Don't waste our time with anything else.
:-)
IMHO writing documentation is tough and it's hard to target the
audience correctly. probably an annotated template would work better
(if anyone has some spare cycles to implement).
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: cut the crap
Posted by Robert Burrell Donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 9:05 PM, Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com> wrote:
> ROTFLMHO.. So tell us how you really feel Roy. :) For what it's worth, I
> agree with you, especially for projects entering incubator.
submit a patch ;-)
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: cut the crap
Posted by Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com>.
Right, for those it makes sense to me...
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>> For what it's worth, I agree with you, especially for projects entering
>>
> incubator.
>
> The IP clearance template isn't generally applicable to projects entering
> the Incubator. It is for processing code grants to existing projects.
>
> --- Noel
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: cut the crap
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
> For what it's worth, I agree with you, especially for projects entering
incubator.
The IP clearance template isn't generally applicable to projects entering
the Incubator. It is for processing code grants to existing projects.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: cut the crap
Posted by Scott O'Bryan <da...@gmail.com>.
ROTFLMHO.. So tell us how you really feel Roy. :) For what it's
worth, I agree with you, especially for projects entering incubator.
Scott
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> I've wasted too much time today on the stupid IP Clearance template
> that insists on asking a bunch of irrelevant questions about
> decisions that the Incubator is not responsible for making.
> The required IP clearance questions should be:
>
> Date:
> Identify the Contribution:
> Identify the Contributor(s):
> What are the filenames for the applicable
> software grant(s):
> Corporate CLA(s):
> Individual CLA(s):
> Location of initial import:
> Destination PMC:
>
> That's it.
>
> Licensing the artifacts, removal of dependencies, changing headers,
> and checking for product trade names are all activities of the PMC
> before a release is made, NOT before an import. Committer access
> is a responsibility of the destination PMC. Prior distribution
> rights are irrelevant. Where on earth did this crap come from?
>
> The template reads like a friggin nanny's club treatise on the
> correct angle to wipe one's ass. The only reason we have this
> form is to record the connection between grant and initial commit.
> Don't waste our time with anything else.
>
> ....Roy
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: cut the crap
Posted by Robert Burrell Donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 10:14 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
<wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>
> >
> > > One more;
> > >
> > > Determine www.a.o/licenses/exports implications
> > > for notifications.
> > >
> >
> > No. That is not part of IP clearance, sorry, and I will not repeat all
> > of the process associated with being a chair within something as trivial
> > as a secretarial function (connecting the dots between the legal paperwork
> > and import). We have better places to document the role of a chair.
> >
>
> Ahhh of course, we are reading the process from two different perspectives.
>
> Code-import, you are right. Each PMC chair was just given the exercise to
> review the /licenses/exports documentation and determine if their code was
> implicated in that policy. I have no issues with leaving it out of the
> IP clearance doc.
i see nothing wrong with including it within a guide to IP clearance
for projects. deleting the inappropriate sentence is not much a burden
for someone filling in a template so i'm agnostic on inclusion in the
template...
> For a code import into a podling, you would be wrong; Noel (singular) isn't
> in a position to know what's happening in 2 dozen podlings, so this needs
> to
> be spelled out in the process status/flow of the incubating projects.
we're working on a guide to bootstrapping podlings including IP import
help for podlings. i had it in mind to include it in there.
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: cut the crap
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>> One more;
>>
>> Determine www.a.o/licenses/exports implications
>> for notifications.
>
> No. That is not part of IP clearance, sorry, and I will not repeat all
> of the process associated with being a chair within something as trivial
> as a secretarial function (connecting the dots between the legal paperwork
> and import). We have better places to document the role of a chair.
Ahhh of course, we are reading the process from two different perspectives.
Code-import, you are right. Each PMC chair was just given the exercise to
review the /licenses/exports documentation and determine if their code was
implicated in that policy. I have no issues with leaving it out of the
IP clearance doc.
For a code import into a podling, you would be wrong; Noel (singular) isn't
in a position to know what's happening in 2 dozen podlings, so this needs to
be spelled out in the process status/flow of the incubating projects.
So happy to leave IP clearance alone.
Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: cut the crap
Posted by Robert Burrell Donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 9:13 PM, Roy T. Fielding <fi...@gbiv.com> wrote:
<snip>
> Robert's separation of guide and template was a good start, though my
> version of the template is much smaller.
IMHO the only way that documentation gets written here is by first
draft then collective improvement
> This is not a legal document.
> This is, at most, a secretarial function that is being done so that
> we have a place to look for dotted i's and crossed t's.
+1
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: cut the crap
Posted by "Roy T. Fielding" <fi...@gbiv.com>.
On Apr 21, 2008, at 11:55 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
> Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>> I've wasted too much time today on the stupid IP Clearance template
>> that insists on asking a bunch of irrelevant questions about
>> decisions that the Incubator is not responsible for making.
>> The required IP clearance questions should be:
>> Date:
>> Identify the Contribution:
>> Identify the Contributor(s):
>> What are the filenames for the applicable
>> software grant(s):
>> Corporate CLA(s):
>> Individual CLA(s):
>> Location of initial import:
>> Destination PMC:
>> That's it.
>
> One more;
>
> Determine www.a.o/licenses/exports implications
> for notifications.
No. That is not part of IP clearance, sorry, and I will not repeat all
of the process associated with being a chair within something as trivial
as a secretarial function (connecting the dots between the legal
paperwork
and import). We have better places to document the role of a chair.
Robert's separation of guide and template was a good start, though my
version of the template is much smaller. This is not a legal document.
This is, at most, a secretarial function that is being done so that
we have a place to look for dotted i's and crossed t's.
....Roy
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Revising the IP Clearance Form (was: cut the crap)
Posted by Robert Burrell Donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin
<ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 1:44 PM, Noel J. Bergman <no...@devtech.com> wrote:
>> Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
<snip>
>>> > Given that we now have a Legal Committee, any substantive revision of
>> that
>>> > form should be run through them.
>>> >
>>> > This is not a comment on content, but on process. Let's do due
>> diligence to
>>> > the document.
>>
>> The Legal Committee does not appear to have any concerns over Roy's proposed
>> changes.
>
> <legal-hat>
> i don't recall being officially asked
> </legal-hat>
ok
i've proposed that https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-74
is used to draft up some minimal principles suitable from the
legal-affairs perspective. please feel free to comment or post
improvements...
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: Revising the IP Clearance Form (was: cut the crap)
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > The Legal Committee does not appear to have any concerns over Roy's
proposed
> > changes.
> <legal-hat>
> i don't recall being officially asked
> </legal-hat>
I was referring to
Message-ID: <3d...@mail.gmail.com>
in legal-discuss@. In any event, you've proposed a process for the change
in another e-mail, and I am satisfied that it addresses my original comment:
> > This is not a comment on content, but on process. Let's do due
> > diligence to the document.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Revising the IP Clearance Form (was: cut the crap)
Posted by Robert Burrell Donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 1:44 PM, Noel J. Bergman <no...@devtech.com> wrote:
> Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>
>> If the IP template should be RTC then it should be moved into the
>> policy area. But IMO the incubator is not the right place for
>> normative legal policy: the legal committee should maintain policy.
>
> It probably embodies both procedure and policy.
ATM it tries to provide guidance, process and policy but comes up short for each
> And I agree with you, as
> indicated by the message to which you replied:
>
>> > Given that we now have a Legal Committee, any substantive revision of
> that
>> > form should be run through them.
>> >
>> > This is not a comment on content, but on process. Let's do due
> diligence to
>> > the document.
>
> The Legal Committee does not appear to have any concerns over Roy's proposed
> changes.
<legal-hat>
i don't recall being officially asked
</legal-hat>
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: Revising the IP Clearance Form (was: cut the crap)
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> If the IP template should be RTC then it should be moved into the
> policy area. But IMO the incubator is not the right place for
> normative legal policy: the legal committee should maintain policy.
It probably embodies both procedure and policy. And I agree with you, as
indicated by the message to which you replied:
> > Given that we now have a Legal Committee, any substantive revision of
that
> > form should be run through them.
> >
> > This is not a comment on content, but on process. Let's do due
diligence to
> > the document.
The Legal Committee does not appear to have any concerns over Roy's proposed
changes.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Revising the IP Clearance Form (was: cut the crap)
Posted by Robert Burrell Donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On 4/23/08, Noel J. Bergman <no...@devtech.com> wrote:
> Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>
> > i've committed a stripped down template and moved the prose into a
> > guide. this guide is just copy ATM
>
> With all due and sincere respect to Roy, the current IP Clearance form was
> done in conjunction with the Board. Over the past several years it has been
> modified slightly by the current President, Chair, and at least one other
> Director, so it is not some unknown quantity haphazardly slapped together.
> Given that we now have a Legal Committee, any substantive revision of that
> form should be run through them.
>
> This is not a comment on content, but on process. Let's do due diligence to
> the document.
If the IP template should be RTC then it should be moved into the
policy area. But IMO the incubator is not the right place for
normative legal policy: the legal committee should maintain policy.
I agree with Roy. The educational aspect obscures the function. The
current template is in need of revision since it satisfies neither
goal.
But I don't have the energy to push through any policy changes ATM.
Just revert the changes and open another JIRA...
Robert
>
> --- Noel
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Revising the IP Clearance Form (was: cut the crap)
Posted by Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 5:21 PM, Noel J. Bergman <no...@devtech.com> wrote:
> Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>
>> i've committed a stripped down template and moved the prose into a
>> guide. this guide is just copy ATM
>
> With all due and sincere respect to Roy, the current IP Clearance form was
> done in conjunction with the Board. Over the past several years it has been
> modified slightly by the current President, Chair, and at least one other
> Director, so it is not some unknown quantity haphazardly slapped together.
> Given that we now have a Legal Committee, any substantive revision of that
> form should be run through them.
>
> This is not a comment on content, but on process. Let's do due diligence to
> the document.
Something I've meant to bring up for a while - do we need to get
trademark granting in there?
I'm thinking of when a project joins and retains the name it had
originally. It seems to usually happen with existing Open Source
projects rather than projects which are moving in from private
communities.
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Revising the IP Clearance Form (was: cut the crap)
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> i've committed a stripped down template and moved the prose into a
> guide. this guide is just copy ATM
With all due and sincere respect to Roy, the current IP Clearance form was
done in conjunction with the Board. Over the past several years it has been
modified slightly by the current President, Chair, and at least one other
Director, so it is not some unknown quantity haphazardly slapped together.
Given that we now have a Legal Committee, any substantive revision of that
form should be run through them.
This is not a comment on content, but on process. Let's do due diligence to
the document.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: cut the crap
Posted by Robert Burrell Donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 8:04 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
<wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>
> Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 11:14 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin
> > <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 7:55 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
> > > <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> > > > Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I've wasted too much time today on the stupid IP Clearance template
> > > > > that insists on asking a bunch of irrelevant questions about
> > > > > decisions that the Incubator is not responsible for making.
> > > > > The required IP clearance questions should be:
> > > > >
> > > > > Date:
> > > > > Identify the Contribution:
> > > > > Identify the Contributor(s):
> > > > > What are the filenames for the applicable
> > > > > software grant(s):
> > > > > Corporate CLA(s):
> > > > > Individual CLA(s):
> > > > > Location of initial import:
> > > > > Destination PMC:
> > > > >
> > > > > That's it.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > One more;
> > > >
> > > > Determine www.a.o/licenses/exports implications
> > > > for notifications.
> > > >
> > > > That's my last crypto audit step, putting that request to all
> incubator
> > > > podlings and ensuring this mess is under control moving forwards.
> Without
> > > > adding this as an IP import step, it won't happen.
> > >
> > > i've committed a stripped down template and moved the prose into a
> > > guide. this guide is just copy ATM but i'll try to find some time to
> > > tidy it up sometime tomorrow.
> > >
> > > feedback on the template appreciated or just jump in with a patch ;-)
> > >
> >
> > after process objections, i've reverted the source and withdraw this
> > patch. if anyone wants to pick it up, i've opened a JIRA.
> >
>
> Thanks Robert, I actually think it was a mistake not to just leave things
> be.
roy's right: the form's filled with rubbish that isn't checked or
enforced by the incubator. it doesn't work as an educational document
either.
> But given that Sam's volunteered his committee to take this on
he has?
> and asked that you back it out,
i've checked my mail and i can find nothing in my inbox
> I'm sure he'll find the volunteer to see it
> through.
same people, different hats
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: cut the crap
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
I had a catastrophic failure of my mail server yesterday (the / partition failed to the point where fsck could not recover). Just catching up, using a backup server, and had to go to the archives to find the traffic:
Robert wrote:
> If the IP template should be RTC then it should be moved into the
> policy area. But IMO the incubator is not the right place for
> normative legal policy: the legal committee should maintain policy.
I agree with you. That was my point.
> I agree with Roy. The educational aspect obscures the function. The
> current template is in need of revision since it satisfies neither
> goal.
I've no disagreement with that at all.
And Roy also says:
> This is not a legal document.
> This is, at most, a secretarial function that is being done so that
> we have a place to look for dotted i's and crossed t's.
Should be, but which i's and t's? There was a lot of debate on that when the thing was done.
Bill says:
> But given that Sam's volunteered his committee to take this on and
> asked that you back it out, I'm sure he'll find the volunteer to
> see it through.
That's probably the best route, all things consideered. Where was that offered? I didn't see that in the archives.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: cut the crap
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 11:14 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin
> <ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 7:55 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
>> <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
>> > Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>> >
>> > > I've wasted too much time today on the stupid IP Clearance template
>> > > that insists on asking a bunch of irrelevant questions about
>> > > decisions that the Incubator is not responsible for making.
>> > > The required IP clearance questions should be:
>> > >
>> > > Date:
>> > > Identify the Contribution:
>> > > Identify the Contributor(s):
>> > > What are the filenames for the applicable
>> > > software grant(s):
>> > > Corporate CLA(s):
>> > > Individual CLA(s):
>> > > Location of initial import:
>> > > Destination PMC:
>> > >
>> > > That's it.
>> > >
>> >
>> > One more;
>> >
>> > Determine www.a.o/licenses/exports implications
>> > for notifications.
>> >
>> > That's my last crypto audit step, putting that request to all incubator
>> > podlings and ensuring this mess is under control moving forwards. Without
>> > adding this as an IP import step, it won't happen.
>>
>> i've committed a stripped down template and moved the prose into a
>> guide. this guide is just copy ATM but i'll try to find some time to
>> tidy it up sometime tomorrow.
>>
>> feedback on the template appreciated or just jump in with a patch ;-)
>
> after process objections, i've reverted the source and withdraw this
> patch. if anyone wants to pick it up, i've opened a JIRA.
Thanks Robert, I actually think it was a mistake not to just leave things
be. But given that Sam's volunteered his committee to take this on and
asked that you back it out, I'm sure he'll find the volunteer to see it
through. Be sure to nag [if|when] that doesn't happen.
Bill
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: cut the crap
Posted by Robert Burrell Donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 11:14 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin
<ro...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 7:55 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
> <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> > Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> >
> > > I've wasted too much time today on the stupid IP Clearance template
> > > that insists on asking a bunch of irrelevant questions about
> > > decisions that the Incubator is not responsible for making.
> > > The required IP clearance questions should be:
> > >
> > > Date:
> > > Identify the Contribution:
> > > Identify the Contributor(s):
> > > What are the filenames for the applicable
> > > software grant(s):
> > > Corporate CLA(s):
> > > Individual CLA(s):
> > > Location of initial import:
> > > Destination PMC:
> > >
> > > That's it.
> > >
> >
> > One more;
> >
> > Determine www.a.o/licenses/exports implications
> > for notifications.
> >
> > That's my last crypto audit step, putting that request to all incubator
> > podlings and ensuring this mess is under control moving forwards. Without
> > adding this as an IP import step, it won't happen.
>
> i've committed a stripped down template and moved the prose into a
> guide. this guide is just copy ATM but i'll try to find some time to
> tidy it up sometime tomorrow.
>
> feedback on the template appreciated or just jump in with a patch ;-)
after process objections, i've reverted the source and withdraw this
patch. if anyone wants to pick it up, i've opened a JIRA.
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: cut the crap
Posted by Robert Burrell Donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 7:55 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
<wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>
> > I've wasted too much time today on the stupid IP Clearance template
> > that insists on asking a bunch of irrelevant questions about
> > decisions that the Incubator is not responsible for making.
> > The required IP clearance questions should be:
> >
> > Date:
> > Identify the Contribution:
> > Identify the Contributor(s):
> > What are the filenames for the applicable
> > software grant(s):
> > Corporate CLA(s):
> > Individual CLA(s):
> > Location of initial import:
> > Destination PMC:
> >
> > That's it.
> >
>
> One more;
>
> Determine www.a.o/licenses/exports implications
> for notifications.
>
> That's my last crypto audit step, putting that request to all incubator
> podlings and ensuring this mess is under control moving forwards. Without
> adding this as an IP import step, it won't happen.
i've committed a stripped down template and moved the prose into a
guide. this guide is just copy ATM but i'll try to find some time to
tidy it up sometime tomorrow.
feedback on the template appreciated or just jump in with a patch ;-)
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: cut the crap
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> I've wasted too much time today on the stupid IP Clearance template
> that insists on asking a bunch of irrelevant questions about
> decisions that the Incubator is not responsible for making.
> The required IP clearance questions should be:
>
> Date:
> Identify the Contribution:
> Identify the Contributor(s):
> What are the filenames for the applicable
> software grant(s):
> Corporate CLA(s):
> Individual CLA(s):
> Location of initial import:
> Destination PMC:
>
> That's it.
One more;
Determine www.a.o/licenses/exports implications
for notifications.
That's my last crypto audit step, putting that request to all incubator
podlings and ensuring this mess is under control moving forwards. Without
adding this as an IP import step, it won't happen.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: cut the crap
Posted by Robert Burrell Donkin <ro...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 10:31 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
<wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
<snip>
> I still think JIRA'izing this is overkill :)
it's just a way of parking the issue for now
- robert
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: cut the crap
Posted by "William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>.
I'm sorry - I had mixed up Noel's comments with Sam (which is not an easy
thing to do once you know them both ;-)
Please don't worry about plugging legal into the loop until you are done.
Then just send a notice to legal-discuss@ with a link to the page. It's
really that simple, they trust "us" (incubator) to handle these things.
I still think JIRA'izing this is overkill :)
Bill
Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>
>> that insists on asking a bunch of irrelevant questions about
>> decisions that the Incubator is not responsible for making.
>
>> Where on earth did this crap come from?
>
> According to SVN
>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/public/trunk/site-author/ip-clearanc
> e/ip-clearance-template.xml?view=log
>
> the first version was from me, in consultation with the Board, four (4)
> years ago in 2004, and was a stripped down version of the Incubation
> template. Comparing the current to the original:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/public/trunk/site-author/ip-clearan
> ce/ip-clearance-template.xml?r1=46659&r2=519113&diff_format=h
>
> I suspect that your issues are in the original.
>
>> The required IP clearance questions should be
>
> Contributions welcomed.
>
> --- Noel
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
RE: cut the crap
Posted by "Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>.
Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> that insists on asking a bunch of irrelevant questions about
> decisions that the Incubator is not responsible for making.
> Where on earth did this crap come from?
According to SVN
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/public/trunk/site-author/ip-clearanc
e/ip-clearance-template.xml?view=log
the first version was from me, in consultation with the Board, four (4)
years ago in 2004, and was a stripped down version of the Incubation
template. Comparing the current to the original:
http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/public/trunk/site-author/ip-clearan
ce/ip-clearance-template.xml?r1=46659&r2=519113&diff_format=h
I suspect that your issues are in the original.
> The required IP clearance questions should be
Contributions welcomed.
--- Noel
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org