Re: Dialog - NOTICEs at APR

[Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net>]

On 9/27/06, William A. Rowe, Jr. <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>
> > So here's my question [...] to the project;
> >
> >   do we want to change the very nature of collecting individual copyright
> >   statements in NOTICE from all major contributors?  Do we believe this
> >   would encourage other worthwhile contributions?
>
> I'm afraid the crux of this question got lost in the noise of a specific
> dialog.  Thoughts and comments?

I don't see why mention in NOTICE is any better than CHANGES, and
honestly I prefer CHANGES, since it notes what exactly was contributed
and by who.

-garrett

Re: Dialog - NOTICEs at APR

[Ruediger Pluem <rp...@apache.org>]

On 09/27/2006 10:38 PM, Garrett Rooney wrote:
> On 9/27/06, William A. Rowe, Jr. <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> 
>> William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
>>
>> > So here's my question [...] to the project;
>> >
>> >   do we want to change the very nature of collecting individual
>> copyright
>> >   statements in NOTICE from all major contributors?  Do we believe this
>> >   would encourage other worthwhile contributions?
>>
>> I'm afraid the crux of this question got lost in the noise of a specific
>> dialog.  Thoughts and comments?
> 
> 
> I don't see why mention in NOTICE is any better than CHANGES, and
> honestly I prefer CHANGES, since it notes what exactly was contributed
> and by who.

+1

Regards

Rüdiger

Re: Dialog - NOTICEs at APR

["William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>]

Garrett Rooney wrote:
> 
> If Sun or Covalent gives a damn about getting properly credited then
> they can tell their committers to use their @themothership.com address
> on the list.

Absolutely.  But note that our @apache.org identities also obscuficate
this somewhat.

It doesn't concern me; I'm just pointing out that the mapping you suggest
is imperfect.

Re: Dialog - NOTICEs at APR

[Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net>]

On 10/9/06, Henry Jen <he...@ztune.net> wrote:

> Glad to tell you that our legal department is sane enough and agreed we
> can just drop the notice as option 1.a. Hopefully this remove the hurdle
> and can get the code committed.
>
> Should I submit the patch once again or this email is enough to show you
> we agree to drop the copyright notice?

That's fantastic, if you could send in a new patch that would be ideal.

-garrett

Re: Dialog - NOTICEs at APR

["William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>]

Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 05:56:56PM -0400, Garrett Rooney wrote:
> 
> We can choose to accept he patch with those terms, or to not accept it,
> but we absolutely cannot over-ride the copyright owners wishes. 

You hit the nail on the head.  A submission with a NOTICE requires that
the NOTICE is republished by us, and all downstream users & packagers.
For example, about this current submission, I can't commit it and say
"well, how we would like to handle it is just omit it".  We accept the
submission with it's notices or we reject it entirely.  We don't ever
override their request.

> Of course, we can come up with a useful suggestion, hopefully acceptable
> to all. but it's worth noting that right now ASL 2.0 4.d basically
> suggests that the NOTICES file is the correct place for notices of this
> nature.

That's correct, it's the one appropriate place.

> It's a good idea that copyright owners get explicit notices if they want
> them, after all if someone wants to re-license that content, or if they
> suspect an infringement, they need to contact the primary copyright
> owner.

And -that- is the gist of my question - thanks for your comments.  I really
hope to see feedback from more of the PMC members, especially those on SVN
and HTTPD who are directly affected by the downstream notice requirements.
The more feedback the merrier.

Bill

Re: Dialog - NOTICEs at APR

[Henry Jen <he...@ztune.net>]

Colm MacCarthaigh wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 05:56:56PM -0400, Garrett Rooney wrote:
>> If Sun or Covalent gives a damn about getting properly credited then
>> they can tell their committers to use their @themothership.com address
>> on the list.
> 
> When people gain commit, with emphasis on the word "people" there,
> we generally start refering to them by name only. 
> 
> As a meritocracy, we give credit to the individuals who write code or
> docs or whatever, and that's what names in CHANGES are really about.
> We don't give a crap who they work for, or if they change jobs, or
> e-mail addresses, the credit is personal to them.
> 
> Acknowledging a copyright is a different thing IMO. Personal
> contributors can own their own copyright, or frequently, it may be owned
> by their employer. If a copyright owner wants the acknowledgement
> they are rightly entitled there is nothing we can do about it. Basic
> copyright law, and the ASL 2.0 4.c (which is how the work is licensed
> to us) definitely apply.
> 
> It's a good idea that copyright owners get explicit notices if they want
> them, after all if someone wants to re-license that content, or if they
> suspect an infringement, they need to contact the primary copyright
> owner. 
> 
> We can choose to accept he patch with those terms, or to not accept it,
> but we absolutely cannot over-ride the copyright owners wishes. 
> 
> Of course, we can come up with a useful suggestion, hopefully acceptable
> to all. but it's worth noting that right now ASL 2.0 4.d basically
> suggests that the NOTICES file is the correct place for notices of this
> nature. 
> 


This is a very good comment and says everything I have to say for this 
topic, I chose to keep silence in purpose before we can settle down the 
discussion. :-)

Glad to tell you that our legal department is sane enough and agreed we 
can just drop the notice as option 1.a. Hopefully this remove the hurdle 
and can get the code committed.

Should I submit the patch once again or this email is enough to show you 
we agree to drop the copyright notice?

This is taking longer than what I had expected, as from very beginning 
we wanted to contribute the code. It's me that not being familiar with 
both Sun's process and Apache's process. It feels good all the 
legal/process issues seems to be completed. :-)

Cheers,
Henry

Re: Dialog - NOTICEs at APR

[Colm MacCarthaigh <co...@stdlib.net>]

On Wed, Sep 27, 2006 at 05:56:56PM -0400, Garrett Rooney wrote:
> If Sun or Covalent gives a damn about getting properly credited then
> they can tell their committers to use their @themothership.com address
> on the list.

When people gain commit, with emphasis on the word "people" there,
we generally start refering to them by name only. 

As a meritocracy, we give credit to the individuals who write code or
docs or whatever, and that's what names in CHANGES are really about.
We don't give a crap who they work for, or if they change jobs, or
e-mail addresses, the credit is personal to them.

Acknowledging a copyright is a different thing IMO. Personal
contributors can own their own copyright, or frequently, it may be owned
by their employer. If a copyright owner wants the acknowledgement
they are rightly entitled there is nothing we can do about it. Basic
copyright law, and the ASL 2.0 4.c (which is how the work is licensed
to us) definitely apply.

It's a good idea that copyright owners get explicit notices if they want
them, after all if someone wants to re-license that content, or if they
suspect an infringement, they need to contact the primary copyright
owner. 

We can choose to accept he patch with those terms, or to not accept it,
but we absolutely cannot over-ride the copyright owners wishes. 

Of course, we can come up with a useful suggestion, hopefully acceptable
to all. but it's worth noting that right now ASL 2.0 4.d basically
suggests that the NOTICES file is the correct place for notices of this
nature. 

-- 
Colm MacCárthaigh                        Public Key: colm+pgp@stdlib.net

Re: Dialog - NOTICEs at APR

[Garrett Rooney <ro...@electricjellyfish.net>]

On 9/27/06, William A. Rowe, Jr. <wr...@rowe-clan.net> wrote:
> Garrett Rooney wrote:
> >
> > I don't see why mention in NOTICE is any better than CHANGES, and
> > honestly I prefer CHANGES, since it notes what exactly was contributed
> > and by who.
>
> Well, that's mostly true.  But if there's a Sun commit from ztune.net,
> or a Covalent commit from rowe-clan.net, well, that association can get
> lost in the noise.

If Sun or Covalent gives a damn about getting properly credited then
they can tell their committers to use their @themothership.com address
on the list.

-garrett

Re: Dialog - NOTICEs at APR

["William A. Rowe, Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>]

Garrett Rooney wrote:
> 
> I don't see why mention in NOTICE is any better than CHANGES, and
> honestly I prefer CHANGES, since it notes what exactly was contributed
> and by who.

Well, that's mostly true.  But if there's a Sun commit from ztune.net,
or a Covalent commit from rowe-clan.net, well, that association can get
lost in the noise.