Re: Sieve needs a home!

[Serge Knystautas <se...@lokitech.com>]

Danny Angus wrote:
> Agreed, I've been lurking on at least one list where this is happening and
> it looks like it is reasonably straightforward.
> 
> +1 to sieve sub-project championed by serge.
> 
> with this caveat... We should not restrict cvs access as in Jakarta, but
> must have a single james-wide karma.

+0.

This is a side note.. it troubles me that there's uncertain about how to 
absorp this IP (legally).  I don't think the ASF community is doing 
enough to publicize these IP rules and procedures.  After the questions 
about whether this needs the incubator and checking with Avalon's PMC, 
for the first time felt sympathy for Howard and the Jakarta PMC about 
Hivemind, since what I thought was widely known clearly isn't.

> I believe that this ought to be discussed on general@ as it is largely
> irrelevant to server-dev.

Done.

-- 
Serge Knystautas
President
Lokitech >>> software . strategy . design >> http://www.lokitech.com
p. 301.656.5501
e. sergek@lokitech.com

Re: Sieve needs a home!

[Serge Knystautas <se...@lokitech.com>]

Noel J. Bergman wrote:
>>for the first time felt sympathy for Howard and the Jakarta PMC about
>>Hivemind, since what I thought was widely known clearly isn't.
> 
> Hivemind is a totally unrelated situation.  Hivemind was developed Howard
> under his CLA, all within the Apache CVS.  The problem with Hivemind is that
> Howard did not know that by being paid by his employer to work on Hivemind,
> he had given up rights to the code, and was therefore unable to contribute
> the code.  We should make sure that all Committters are aware of
> work-for-hire issues.  Which brings us to ...

Hivemind was a somewhat more complicated situation, so the fact that we 
treat this case ad-hoc creates my sympathy for them.  To me both are 
straight-forward, but I'm on board@, license@, licensing@, 
general@jakarta, commons-dev/user@ (where hivemind "happened"), 
infrastructure@, yadadadadada (yes it's true, I get no real work done 
beyond reading mailing lists).  So I probably have a good understanding 
of what has been decided.  I also write my employee contracts and client 
contracts.

It's not a big deal.  It just struck me that we're asking so many more 
people to be part of PMCs across the ASF, and one of the key 
responsibilities of PMC members is to oversee IP absorbtion.  This event 
made me realize the communication of guidelines to handle this 
responsibility is lacking, so IP absorption is still handled ad-hoc. 
(obviously that will not scale nor protect the organization from 
improper IP absorption, and recognize it's being worked on.)

> Don't you think that we should make sure that our Committers know that they
> should be subscribed here?  :-)  I don't believe that either Jason or Steve
> are subscribed here, although everyone else appeared to be subscribed at a
> quick glance.  CC'ing them, and suggesting that they subscribe.

I figure anyone who's earned committer status is aware of the list, has 
decided to be on there or not, and could easily rectify it if they so 
wanted.

-- 
Serge Knystautas
President
Lokitech >> software . strategy . design >> http://www.lokitech.com
p. 301.656.5501
e. sergek@lokitech.com

RE: Sieve needs a home!

["Noel J. Bergman" <no...@devtech.com>]

Serge Knystautas wrote:

> Danny Angus wrote:
> > Agreed, I've been lurking on at least one list where this is
> > happening and> it looks like it is reasonably straightforward.
> > +1 to sieve sub-project championed by serge.
> > with this caveat... We should not restrict cvs access as in
> >  Jakarta, but must have a single james-wide karma.

> +0.

I think I'm +0 as well, on the following grounds: a new Committer might get
karma for a specific area, if we found that to be any sort of useful thing,
but we should be more aggressive about getting Committers onto the PMC, and
once there they have (and are expected to use as normal) karma for all
modules.

> it troubles me that there's uncertain about how to absorp this
> IP (legally).  I don't think the ASF community is doing enough
> to publicize these IP rules and procedures.

We're working on it.  Unlike MerlinDeveloper, Ruper or Axion, to pick three
recent examples, JSieve was written exclusively (and in this case singly)
under the ASF CLA for the purpose of being a James project.

However, although I don't believe that there really is any reason for it to
go into the Incubator, since I am on both PMCs, and since we (the Incubator
PMC) have been pushing at other projects to bring imported codebases into
the Incubator, I don't want to create the impression that JSieve gets to
slip by because it is *our* ox being gored.  Hence, I forwarded the message
to the Incubator PMC for comment.

> for the first time felt sympathy for Howard and the Jakarta PMC about
> Hivemind, since what I thought was widely known clearly isn't.

Hivemind is a totally unrelated situation.  Hivemind was developed Howard
under his CLA, all within the Apache CVS.  The problem with Hivemind is that
Howard did not know that by being paid by his employer to work on Hivemind,
he had given up rights to the code, and was therefore unable to contribute
the code.  We should make sure that all Committters are aware of
work-for-hire issues.  Which brings us to ...

> > I believe that this ought to be discussed on general@ as it is largely
> > irrelevant to server-dev.

> Done.

Don't you think that we should make sure that our Committers know that they
should be subscribed here?  :-)  I don't believe that either Jason or Steve
are subscribed here, although everyone else appeared to be subscribed at a
quick glance.  CC'ing them, and suggesting that they subscribe.

	--- Noel