You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com> on 2012/08/12 20:28:04 UTC
Amber CLA status [Was: Old projects with incomplete copyright diligence]
Hi Antonio,
This is about making sure that all software being contributed to
Apache is covered by CLAs (continuous contribution) or the software
license grant (single contribution). Legally it would also be fine to
fork software under a Category A license, though it's frowned upon
(ie: the status checkbox doesn't offer it as an option).
By the look of LEGAL-134, it sounds like Amber started as a fork of
University of Newcastle code?
Hen
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Antonio Sanso <as...@adobe.com> wrote:
> Hi Henri,
>
> Amber wise we tracked this in [0].
> Now I am not sure if we can also tick the box.
>
> Regards
>
> Antonio
>
> [0] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-134
>
> On Jul 8, 2012, at 4:22 AM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>
>> The following projects haven't signed off on the copyright checklist item:
>>
>> 2009-02-09 kato
>> 2009-02-13 stonehenge
>> 2009-05-13 socialsite
>> 2010-05-19 amber
>> 2010-09-05 nuvem
>> 2010-11-12 kitty
>> 2010-11-24 stanbol
>> 2011-06-13 openofficeorg
>>
>> Said checklist item is:
>>
>> "Check and make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF
>> been received. It is only necessary to transfer rights for the
>> package, the core code, and any new code produced by the project. "
>>
>> How long do we host software without explicitly stating we have these rights?
>>
>> Personally I think 1 year is more than enough, even for OpenOffice.
>>
>> Note that this list comes from
>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/projects
>>
>> Hen
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Fwd: Amber CLA status [Was: Old projects with incomplete copyright
diligence]
Posted by Antonio Sanso <as...@adobe.com>.
Hi *,
Begin forwarded message:
From: Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com>>
Date: August 23, 2012 9:18:24 AM GMT+02:00
To: "general@incubator.apache.org<ma...@incubator.apache.org>" <ge...@incubator.apache.org>>
Subject: Re: Amber CLA status [Was: Old projects with incomplete copyright diligence]
Reply-To: "general@incubator.apache.org<ma...@incubator.apache.org>" <ge...@incubator.apache.org>>
Sounds like you should sign off on the first item in the Copyright
section of http://incubator.apache.org/projects/amber.html as "n/a".
can anyone update this page?
Regards
Antonio
No code was relicensed to the ASF when Amber was created. Instead it
was a fork of Uni of Newcastle code and that copyright remains on the
code.
Hen
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 1:00 AM, Antonio Sanso <as...@adobe.com>> wrote:
Hi Henri,
thanks for taking care of this.
IANAL but technically yes I think that the OAuth 2.0 part of Amber can be considered as a fork.
Before to perform the first release we followed what has been suggested in LEGAL-134.
Did we miss something? Should we do something more or we can assume this legal issue is over?
Thanks and regards
Antonio
On Aug 12, 2012, at 8:28 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
Hi Antonio,
This is about making sure that all software being contributed to
Apache is covered by CLAs (continuous contribution) or the software
license grant (single contribution). Legally it would also be fine to
fork software under a Category A license, though it's frowned upon
(ie: the status checkbox doesn't offer it as an option).
By the look of LEGAL-134, it sounds like Amber started as a fork of
University of Newcastle code?
Hen
On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Antonio Sanso <as...@adobe.com>> wrote:
Hi Henri,
Amber wise we tracked this in [0].
Now I am not sure if we can also tick the box.
Regards
Antonio
[0] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-134
On Jul 8, 2012, at 4:22 AM, Henri Yandell wrote:
The following projects haven't signed off on the copyright checklist item:
2009-02-09 kato
2009-02-13 stonehenge
2009-05-13 socialsite
2010-05-19 amber
2010-09-05 nuvem
2010-11-12 kitty
2010-11-24 stanbol
2011-06-13 openofficeorg
Said checklist item is:
"Check and make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF
been received. It is only necessary to transfer rights for the
package, the core code, and any new code produced by the project. "
How long do we host software without explicitly stating we have these rights?
Personally I think 1 year is more than enough, even for OpenOffice.
Note that this list comes from
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/projects
Hen
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org<ma...@incubator.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org<ma...@incubator.apache.org>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org<ma...@incubator.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org<ma...@incubator.apache.org>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org<ma...@incubator.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org<ma...@incubator.apache.org>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org<ma...@incubator.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org<ma...@incubator.apache.org>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org<ma...@incubator.apache.org>
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org<ma...@incubator.apache.org>
Re: Amber CLA status [Was: Old projects with incomplete copyright diligence]
Posted by Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com>.
There are other legal items on that page that you should review and
decide if you can check off. If you're releasing, then I would expect
that page to have no unfinished tasks.
Hen
On Thu, Aug 23, 2012 at 12:32 AM, Antonio Sanso <as...@adobe.com> wrote:
> Thanks a lot for your effort Henri,
>
> we will do as you suggested.
>
> Do you thing we are missing anything else legally wise?
>
> Regards
>
> Antonio
>
> On Aug 23, 2012, at 9:18 AM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>
>> Sounds like you should sign off on the first item in the Copyright
>> section of http://incubator.apache.org/projects/amber.html as "n/a".
>> No code was relicensed to the ASF when Amber was created. Instead it
>> was a fork of Uni of Newcastle code and that copyright remains on the
>> code.
>>
>> Hen
>>
>> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 1:00 AM, Antonio Sanso <as...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Henri,
>>>
>>> thanks for taking care of this.
>>>
>>> IANAL but technically yes I think that the OAuth 2.0 part of Amber can be considered as a fork.
>>>
>>> Before to perform the first release we followed what has been suggested in LEGAL-134.
>>> Did we miss something? Should we do something more or we can assume this legal issue is over?
>>>
>>> Thanks and regards
>>>
>>> Antonio
>>>
>>>
>>> On Aug 12, 2012, at 8:28 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Antonio,
>>>>
>>>> This is about making sure that all software being contributed to
>>>> Apache is covered by CLAs (continuous contribution) or the software
>>>> license grant (single contribution). Legally it would also be fine to
>>>> fork software under a Category A license, though it's frowned upon
>>>> (ie: the status checkbox doesn't offer it as an option).
>>>>
>>>> By the look of LEGAL-134, it sounds like Amber started as a fork of
>>>> University of Newcastle code?
>>>>
>>>> Hen
>>>>
>>>> On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Antonio Sanso <as...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hi Henri,
>>>>>
>>>>> Amber wise we tracked this in [0].
>>>>> Now I am not sure if we can also tick the box.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>>
>>>>> Antonio
>>>>>
>>>>> [0] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-134
>>>>>
>>>>> On Jul 8, 2012, at 4:22 AM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> The following projects haven't signed off on the copyright checklist item:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> 2009-02-09 kato
>>>>>> 2009-02-13 stonehenge
>>>>>> 2009-05-13 socialsite
>>>>>> 2010-05-19 amber
>>>>>> 2010-09-05 nuvem
>>>>>> 2010-11-12 kitty
>>>>>> 2010-11-24 stanbol
>>>>>> 2011-06-13 openofficeorg
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Said checklist item is:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> "Check and make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF
>>>>>> been received. It is only necessary to transfer rights for the
>>>>>> package, the core code, and any new code produced by the project. "
>>>>>>
>>>>>> How long do we host software without explicitly stating we have these rights?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Personally I think 1 year is more than enough, even for OpenOffice.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Note that this list comes from
>>>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/projects
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hen
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>>> 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
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 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
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Amber CLA status [Was: Old projects with incomplete copyright
diligence]
Posted by Antonio Sanso <as...@adobe.com>.
Thanks a lot for your effort Henri,
we will do as you suggested.
Do you thing we are missing anything else legally wise?
Regards
Antonio
On Aug 23, 2012, at 9:18 AM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> Sounds like you should sign off on the first item in the Copyright
> section of http://incubator.apache.org/projects/amber.html as "n/a".
> No code was relicensed to the ASF when Amber was created. Instead it
> was a fork of Uni of Newcastle code and that copyright remains on the
> code.
>
> Hen
>
> On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 1:00 AM, Antonio Sanso <as...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> Hi Henri,
>>
>> thanks for taking care of this.
>>
>> IANAL but technically yes I think that the OAuth 2.0 part of Amber can be considered as a fork.
>>
>> Before to perform the first release we followed what has been suggested in LEGAL-134.
>> Did we miss something? Should we do something more or we can assume this legal issue is over?
>>
>> Thanks and regards
>>
>> Antonio
>>
>>
>> On Aug 12, 2012, at 8:28 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Antonio,
>>>
>>> This is about making sure that all software being contributed to
>>> Apache is covered by CLAs (continuous contribution) or the software
>>> license grant (single contribution). Legally it would also be fine to
>>> fork software under a Category A license, though it's frowned upon
>>> (ie: the status checkbox doesn't offer it as an option).
>>>
>>> By the look of LEGAL-134, it sounds like Amber started as a fork of
>>> University of Newcastle code?
>>>
>>> Hen
>>>
>>> On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Antonio Sanso <as...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi Henri,
>>>>
>>>> Amber wise we tracked this in [0].
>>>> Now I am not sure if we can also tick the box.
>>>>
>>>> Regards
>>>>
>>>> Antonio
>>>>
>>>> [0] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-134
>>>>
>>>> On Jul 8, 2012, at 4:22 AM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> The following projects haven't signed off on the copyright checklist item:
>>>>>
>>>>> 2009-02-09 kato
>>>>> 2009-02-13 stonehenge
>>>>> 2009-05-13 socialsite
>>>>> 2010-05-19 amber
>>>>> 2010-09-05 nuvem
>>>>> 2010-11-12 kitty
>>>>> 2010-11-24 stanbol
>>>>> 2011-06-13 openofficeorg
>>>>>
>>>>> Said checklist item is:
>>>>>
>>>>> "Check and make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF
>>>>> been received. It is only necessary to transfer rights for the
>>>>> package, the core code, and any new code produced by the project. "
>>>>>
>>>>> How long do we host software without explicitly stating we have these rights?
>>>>>
>>>>> Personally I think 1 year is more than enough, even for OpenOffice.
>>>>>
>>>>> Note that this list comes from
>>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/projects
>>>>>
>>>>> Hen
>>>>>
>>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> 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
>>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: Amber CLA status [Was: Old projects with incomplete copyright diligence]
Posted by Henri Yandell <fl...@gmail.com>.
Sounds like you should sign off on the first item in the Copyright
section of http://incubator.apache.org/projects/amber.html as "n/a".
No code was relicensed to the ASF when Amber was created. Instead it
was a fork of Uni of Newcastle code and that copyright remains on the
code.
Hen
On Mon, Aug 20, 2012 at 1:00 AM, Antonio Sanso <as...@adobe.com> wrote:
> Hi Henri,
>
> thanks for taking care of this.
>
> IANAL but technically yes I think that the OAuth 2.0 part of Amber can be considered as a fork.
>
> Before to perform the first release we followed what has been suggested in LEGAL-134.
> Did we miss something? Should we do something more or we can assume this legal issue is over?
>
> Thanks and regards
>
> Antonio
>
>
> On Aug 12, 2012, at 8:28 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>
>> Hi Antonio,
>>
>> This is about making sure that all software being contributed to
>> Apache is covered by CLAs (continuous contribution) or the software
>> license grant (single contribution). Legally it would also be fine to
>> fork software under a Category A license, though it's frowned upon
>> (ie: the status checkbox doesn't offer it as an option).
>>
>> By the look of LEGAL-134, it sounds like Amber started as a fork of
>> University of Newcastle code?
>>
>> Hen
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Antonio Sanso <as...@adobe.com> wrote:
>>> Hi Henri,
>>>
>>> Amber wise we tracked this in [0].
>>> Now I am not sure if we can also tick the box.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>>
>>> Antonio
>>>
>>> [0] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-134
>>>
>>> On Jul 8, 2012, at 4:22 AM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>>>
>>>> The following projects haven't signed off on the copyright checklist item:
>>>>
>>>> 2009-02-09 kato
>>>> 2009-02-13 stonehenge
>>>> 2009-05-13 socialsite
>>>> 2010-05-19 amber
>>>> 2010-09-05 nuvem
>>>> 2010-11-12 kitty
>>>> 2010-11-24 stanbol
>>>> 2011-06-13 openofficeorg
>>>>
>>>> Said checklist item is:
>>>>
>>>> "Check and make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF
>>>> been received. It is only necessary to transfer rights for the
>>>> package, the core code, and any new code produced by the project. "
>>>>
>>>> How long do we host software without explicitly stating we have these rights?
>>>>
>>>> Personally I think 1 year is more than enough, even for OpenOffice.
>>>>
>>>> Note that this list comes from
>>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/projects
>>>>
>>>> Hen
>>>>
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> 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
>>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Amber CLA status [Was: Old projects with incomplete copyright
diligence]
Posted by Antonio Sanso <as...@adobe.com>.
Hi Henri,
thanks for taking care of this.
IANAL but technically yes I think that the OAuth 2.0 part of Amber can be considered as a fork.
Before to perform the first release we followed what has been suggested in LEGAL-134.
Did we miss something? Should we do something more or we can assume this legal issue is over?
Thanks and regards
Antonio
On Aug 12, 2012, at 8:28 PM, Henri Yandell wrote:
> Hi Antonio,
>
> This is about making sure that all software being contributed to
> Apache is covered by CLAs (continuous contribution) or the software
> license grant (single contribution). Legally it would also be fine to
> fork software under a Category A license, though it's frowned upon
> (ie: the status checkbox doesn't offer it as an option).
>
> By the look of LEGAL-134, it sounds like Amber started as a fork of
> University of Newcastle code?
>
> Hen
>
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 7:39 AM, Antonio Sanso <as...@adobe.com> wrote:
>> Hi Henri,
>>
>> Amber wise we tracked this in [0].
>> Now I am not sure if we can also tick the box.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> Antonio
>>
>> [0] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-134
>>
>> On Jul 8, 2012, at 4:22 AM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>>
>>> The following projects haven't signed off on the copyright checklist item:
>>>
>>> 2009-02-09 kato
>>> 2009-02-13 stonehenge
>>> 2009-05-13 socialsite
>>> 2010-05-19 amber
>>> 2010-09-05 nuvem
>>> 2010-11-12 kitty
>>> 2010-11-24 stanbol
>>> 2011-06-13 openofficeorg
>>>
>>> Said checklist item is:
>>>
>>> "Check and make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF
>>> been received. It is only necessary to transfer rights for the
>>> package, the core code, and any new code produced by the project. "
>>>
>>> How long do we host software without explicitly stating we have these rights?
>>>
>>> Personally I think 1 year is more than enough, even for OpenOffice.
>>>
>>> Note that this list comes from
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/projects
>>>
>>> Hen
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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
>>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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