You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@rave.apache.org by Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> on 2012/01/30 01:40:32 UTC
[DISCUSSION] IP Clearance on code donations [Was: Re: Graduation?]
On 01/16/2012 07:08 PM, Ate Douma wrote:
> On 01/16/2012 05:12 PM, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote:
>> On 1/16/12 10:56 AM, "Ross Gardler"<rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> * Check and make sure that the files that have been donated have been
>>>> updated to reflect the new ASF copyright.
>>>
>>> Already done, surely?
>>
>>
>> I am not sure about all three donations. We should probably double checkŠ
>
> Yes, we need to make sure. I think I went through that in the beginning, but its
> too long ago already to recall if it was complete(d).
>
> I'll volunteer doing the due diligence on this one, although it might take me a
> few days before I find time to do so.
> I will create a JIRA ticket for this.
>
Please see my follow up on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RAVE-425
I think we've got still quite some work on our place for this ...
As I wrote in the issue, this is something we (the Mentors) clearly dropped the
ball on and should have followed up long time ago already, for which I'd like to
apologize for not doing so.
I tried to provide a set of steps we can follow to resolve this, but for myself
this also is something I haven't dealt with before, so I'd like the other
mentors to chime in as well what they think should be the right way to proceed.
If needed we can consult the other IPMC members to help us out too as there
should be plenty of experience with these things.
And I'm definitely willing to help out directly, with whatever is needed to
speed this up, just let me know.
Regards, Ate
Re: [DISCUSSION] IP Clearance on code donations [Was: Re: Graduation?]
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
On 31 January 2012 10:44, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
> On 01/31/2012 11:23 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>
...
>> Why? There is an SLA on file, the original copyright remains with the
>> donating institutions and they can move it back here whenever they
>> like (assuming licence issues are addressed first)
>
> Sure, but AFAIK once they need to be 'brought back', we'll have to go
> through the same IP Clearance rounds again anyway, as because these no
> longer were maintained (guarded) on ASF hardware, we cannot and will not
> assume them to be the same (upfront) as te original donations.
> That's all rather theoretical I agree, but nonetheless from a legal POV
> quite critical.
Hmmmm.... yes... I can see some policy wonks getting all worked up
about that. We could do without an endless discussion about the
written rules vs. the intent of the rules (i.e we can demonstrate no
writes to the code between the various dates). It would be faster to
fix the issues here than have that argument with the broader
community.
Assuming the PPMC is not 100% certain that they will never want the
code in question I withdraw my suggestion. Ate raises important
points.
Ross
Re: [DISCUSSION] IP Clearance on code donations [Was: Re: Graduation?]
Posted by Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu>.
On 01/31/2012 11:23 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> On 31 January 2012 10:10, Ate Douma<at...@douma.nu> wrote:
>> On 01/31/2012 10:47 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>>
>>> On 31 January 2012 08:42, Niels van Dijk<ni...@surfnet.nl> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Ate,
>>>>
>>>> In the Jira ticket you show the result of a scan that tested for
>>>> potential isssues. Is it also possible to let such a scan actually list
>>>> the files it thinks are in error? that would already be a lot less work
>>>> that browse trough all source code.
>>>
>>>
>>> See the attachment on the issue
>>>
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12512376/rat-scan-initial-rave-donations.txt
>>>
>>> All these files are in rave-donations and thus not part of any
>>> release. My recommendation would be simply to move the whole
>>> rave-donations tree to apache-extras-org and mark it as an archive
>>> project.
>>
>>
>> Hmm, that's rather a bold way of 'solving' the issue. And I'm not sure I
>> simply agree on this suggestion upfront without properly considering if your
>> statement above is correct, or without considering the possible
>> consequences.
>
> Very wise.
>
>> First of all, it is true that *currently* none of the initial code donations
>> are part of any release (verbatim). And maybe they never will. But the
>> initial *intend* of these donations, and for which the donators went through
>> quite an effort, is that any or some part of these donation might be
>> (re)used later if so desired.
>
> Yes, but the ability to reuse is not lost by hosting them elsewhere.
Sure, but the same could be said for reuse these code bases before it was donated.
>
>> By 'dumping' these code donations elsewhere (outside the ASF), we'll lose
>> the provenance of these code donations, and any future intend to (re)use
>> these will again require them to be re-evaluated.
>
> Why? There is an SLA on file, the original copyright remains with the
> donating institutions and they can move it back here whenever they
> like (assuming licence issues are addressed first)
Sure, but AFAIK once they need to be 'brought back', we'll have to go through
the same IP Clearance rounds again anyway, as because these no longer were
maintained (guarded) on ASF hardware, we cannot and will not assume them to be
the same (upfront) as te original donations.
That's all rather theoretical I agree, but nonetheless from a legal POV quite
critical.
>
>> For the record: AFAIK *all* these code donations originate from an already
>> open and available public repository, in which they probably have evolved
>> since, but that also means I see no additional benefit to move them yet
>> again somewhere else. If nobody cares anymore about these initial donations,
>> simply deleting would be just as good, actually even better. A new
>> 'abandoned' apache-extras project nobody cares for looking at doesn't surf
>> any purpose IMO.
>
> I seem to remember that at least one of the donations was not on a
> public repository. Even if they all were, some were institutional
> repositories and therefore provide no guarantee if still being
> available (true apache-extras could go too, but we have an SLA there
> with minimum notice periods).
>
>> If the rest of the PMC thinks this is a good idea, I will have no objections
>> either, but everybody please do consider this carefully.
>
> I guess it boils down to balancing the effort between resolving the IP
> issues here before graduation and the concerns you (rightly) express.
Sure.
The first question then probably should be: how much effort does it take to
resolve the remaining IP issues?
Although it might require some plumbing, I think the suggestions I gave earlier
in the JIRA issue aren't really difficult to implement, more or less are about
stripping down the donations to only the sources that matter and which can
(easily) be IP cleared.
Shouldn't take more than a few hours IMO for each donation.
But if that turns out not to be so simple, your suggestion might be valid
alternative to consider.
>
> Ross
Re: [DISCUSSION] IP Clearance on code donations [Was: Re: Graduation?]
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
On 31 January 2012 10:10, Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu> wrote:
> On 01/31/2012 10:47 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>
>> On 31 January 2012 08:42, Niels van Dijk<ni...@surfnet.nl> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Ate,
>>>
>>> In the Jira ticket you show the result of a scan that tested for
>>> potential isssues. Is it also possible to let such a scan actually list
>>> the files it thinks are in error? that would already be a lot less work
>>> that browse trough all source code.
>>
>>
>> See the attachment on the issue
>>
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12512376/rat-scan-initial-rave-donations.txt
>>
>> All these files are in rave-donations and thus not part of any
>> release. My recommendation would be simply to move the whole
>> rave-donations tree to apache-extras-org and mark it as an archive
>> project.
>
>
> Hmm, that's rather a bold way of 'solving' the issue. And I'm not sure I
> simply agree on this suggestion upfront without properly considering if your
> statement above is correct, or without considering the possible
> consequences.
Very wise.
> First of all, it is true that *currently* none of the initial code donations
> are part of any release (verbatim). And maybe they never will. But the
> initial *intend* of these donations, and for which the donators went through
> quite an effort, is that any or some part of these donation might be
> (re)used later if so desired.
Yes, but the ability to reuse is not lost by hosting them elsewhere.
> By 'dumping' these code donations elsewhere (outside the ASF), we'll lose
> the provenance of these code donations, and any future intend to (re)use
> these will again require them to be re-evaluated.
Why? There is an SLA on file, the original copyright remains with the
donating institutions and they can move it back here whenever they
like (assuming licence issues are addressed first)
> For the record: AFAIK *all* these code donations originate from an already
> open and available public repository, in which they probably have evolved
> since, but that also means I see no additional benefit to move them yet
> again somewhere else. If nobody cares anymore about these initial donations,
> simply deleting would be just as good, actually even better. A new
> 'abandoned' apache-extras project nobody cares for looking at doesn't surf
> any purpose IMO.
I seem to remember that at least one of the donations was not on a
public repository. Even if they all were, some were institutional
repositories and therefore provide no guarantee if still being
available (true apache-extras could go too, but we have an SLA there
with minimum notice periods).
> If the rest of the PMC thinks this is a good idea, I will have no objections
> either, but everybody please do consider this carefully.
I guess it boils down to balancing the effort between resolving the IP
issues here before graduation and the concerns you (rightly) express.
Ross
Re: [DISCUSSION] IP Clearance on code donations [Was: Re: Graduation?]
Posted by Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu>.
On 01/31/2012 10:47 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
> On 31 January 2012 08:42, Niels van Dijk<ni...@surfnet.nl> wrote:
>> Hi Ate,
>>
>> In the Jira ticket you show the result of a scan that tested for
>> potential isssues. Is it also possible to let such a scan actually list
>> the files it thinks are in error? that would already be a lot less work
>> that browse trough all source code.
>
> See the attachment on the issue
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12512376/rat-scan-initial-rave-donations.txt
>
> All these files are in rave-donations and thus not part of any
> release. My recommendation would be simply to move the whole
> rave-donations tree to apache-extras-org and mark it as an archive
> project.
Hmm, that's rather a bold way of 'solving' the issue. And I'm not sure I simply
agree on this suggestion upfront without properly considering if your statement
above is correct, or without considering the possible consequences.
First of all, it is true that *currently* none of the initial code donations are
part of any release (verbatim). And maybe they never will. But the initial
*intend* of these donations, and for which the donators went through quite an
effort, is that any or some part of these donation might be (re)used later if so
desired.
By 'dumping' these code donations elsewhere (outside the ASF), we'll lose the
provenance of these code donations, and any future intend to (re)use these will
again require them to be re-evaluated.
For the record: AFAIK *all* these code donations originate from an already open
and available public repository, in which they probably have evolved since, but
that also means I see no additional benefit to move them yet again somewhere
else. If nobody cares anymore about these initial donations, simply deleting
would be just as good, actually even better. A new 'abandoned' apache-extras
project nobody cares for looking at doesn't surf any purpose IMO.
If the rest of the PMC thinks this is a good idea, I will have no objections
either, but everybody please do consider this carefully.
Ate
>
> Ross
>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Niels
>>
>> On 01/30/2012 01:40 AM, Ate Douma wrote:
>>> On 01/16/2012 07:08 PM, Ate Douma wrote:
>>>> On 01/16/2012 05:12 PM, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote:
>>>>> On 1/16/12 10:56 AM, "Ross Gardler"<rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> * Check and make sure that the files that have been donated have been
>>>>>>> updated to reflect the new ASF copyright.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Already done, surely?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not sure about all three donations. We should probably double
>>>>> checkŠ
>>>>
>>>> Yes, we need to make sure. I think I went through that in the
>>>> beginning, but its
>>>> too long ago already to recall if it was complete(d).
>>>>
>>>> I'll volunteer doing the due diligence on this one, although it might
>>>> take me a
>>>> few days before I find time to do so.
>>>> I will create a JIRA ticket for this.
>>>>
>>> Please see my follow up on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RAVE-425
>>>
>>> I think we've got still quite some work on our place for this ...
>>>
>>> As I wrote in the issue, this is something we (the Mentors) clearly
>>> dropped the ball on and should have followed up long time ago already,
>>> for which I'd like to apologize for not doing so.
>>>
>>> I tried to provide a set of steps we can follow to resolve this, but
>>> for myself this also is something I haven't dealt with before, so I'd
>>> like the other mentors to chime in as well what they think should be
>>> the right way to proceed.
>>>
>>> If needed we can consult the other IPMC members to help us out too as
>>> there should be plenty of experience with these things.
>>>
>>> And I'm definitely willing to help out directly, with whatever is
>>> needed to speed this up, just let me know.
>>>
>>> Regards, Ate
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSSION] IP Clearance on code donations [Was: Re:
Graduation?]
Posted by "Franklin, Matthew B." <mf...@mitre.org>.
On 1/31/12 4:47 AM, "Ross Gardler" <rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
>On 31 January 2012 08:42, Niels van Dijk <ni...@surfnet.nl> wrote:
>> Hi Ate,
>>
>> In the Jira ticket you show the result of a scan that tested for
>> potential isssues. Is it also possible to let such a scan actually list
>> the files it thinks are in error? that would already be a lot less work
>> that browse trough all source code.
>
>See the attachment on the issue
>https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12512376/rat-scan-initial
>-rave-donations.txt
>
>All these files are in rave-donations and thus not part of any
>release. My recommendation would be simply to move the whole
>rave-donations tree to apache-extras-org and mark it as an archive
>project.
Most of the OSEC files in error are libs or 3rd party sources that are not
"our" code. If no one objects, I am simply going to delete these from SVN
as IMO we don't need the donated OSEC code to actually build/run; we just
need it as a reference.
>
>Ross
>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Niels
>>
>> On 01/30/2012 01:40 AM, Ate Douma wrote:
>>> On 01/16/2012 07:08 PM, Ate Douma wrote:
>>>> On 01/16/2012 05:12 PM, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote:
>>>>> On 1/16/12 10:56 AM, "Ross Gardler"<rg...@opendirective.com>
>>>>>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> * Check and make sure that the files that have been donated have
>>>>>>>been
>>>>>>> updated to reflect the new ASF copyright.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Already done, surely?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not sure about all three donations. We should probably double
>>>>> checkŠ
>>>>
>>>> Yes, we need to make sure. I think I went through that in the
>>>> beginning, but its
>>>> too long ago already to recall if it was complete(d).
>>>>
>>>> I'll volunteer doing the due diligence on this one, although it might
>>>> take me a
>>>> few days before I find time to do so.
>>>> I will create a JIRA ticket for this.
>>>>
>>> Please see my follow up on
>>>https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RAVE-425
>>>
>>> I think we've got still quite some work on our place for this ...
>>>
>>> As I wrote in the issue, this is something we (the Mentors) clearly
>>> dropped the ball on and should have followed up long time ago already,
>>> for which I'd like to apologize for not doing so.
>>>
>>> I tried to provide a set of steps we can follow to resolve this, but
>>> for myself this also is something I haven't dealt with before, so I'd
>>> like the other mentors to chime in as well what they think should be
>>> the right way to proceed.
>>>
>>> If needed we can consult the other IPMC members to help us out too as
>>> there should be plenty of experience with these things.
>>>
>>> And I'm definitely willing to help out directly, with whatever is
>>> needed to speed this up, just let me know.
>>>
>>> Regards, Ate
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>--
>Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
>Programme Leader (Open Development)
>OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
Re: [DISCUSSION] IP Clearance on code donations [Was: Re: Graduation?]
Posted by Ross Gardler <rg...@opendirective.com>.
On 31 January 2012 08:42, Niels van Dijk <ni...@surfnet.nl> wrote:
> Hi Ate,
>
> In the Jira ticket you show the result of a scan that tested for
> potential isssues. Is it also possible to let such a scan actually list
> the files it thinks are in error? that would already be a lot less work
> that browse trough all source code.
See the attachment on the issue
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/attachment/12512376/rat-scan-initial-rave-donations.txt
All these files are in rave-donations and thus not part of any
release. My recommendation would be simply to move the whole
rave-donations tree to apache-extras-org and mark it as an archive
project.
Ross
>
> Cheers,
> Niels
>
> On 01/30/2012 01:40 AM, Ate Douma wrote:
>> On 01/16/2012 07:08 PM, Ate Douma wrote:
>>> On 01/16/2012 05:12 PM, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote:
>>>> On 1/16/12 10:56 AM, "Ross Gardler"<rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> * Check and make sure that the files that have been donated have been
>>>>>> updated to reflect the new ASF copyright.
>>>>>
>>>>> Already done, surely?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am not sure about all three donations. We should probably double
>>>> checkŠ
>>>
>>> Yes, we need to make sure. I think I went through that in the
>>> beginning, but its
>>> too long ago already to recall if it was complete(d).
>>>
>>> I'll volunteer doing the due diligence on this one, although it might
>>> take me a
>>> few days before I find time to do so.
>>> I will create a JIRA ticket for this.
>>>
>> Please see my follow up on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RAVE-425
>>
>> I think we've got still quite some work on our place for this ...
>>
>> As I wrote in the issue, this is something we (the Mentors) clearly
>> dropped the ball on and should have followed up long time ago already,
>> for which I'd like to apologize for not doing so.
>>
>> I tried to provide a set of steps we can follow to resolve this, but
>> for myself this also is something I haven't dealt with before, so I'd
>> like the other mentors to chime in as well what they think should be
>> the right way to proceed.
>>
>> If needed we can consult the other IPMC members to help us out too as
>> there should be plenty of experience with these things.
>>
>> And I'm definitely willing to help out directly, with whatever is
>> needed to speed this up, just let me know.
>>
>> Regards, Ate
>>
>>
>>
--
Ross Gardler (@rgardler)
Programme Leader (Open Development)
OpenDirective http://opendirective.com
Re: [DISCUSSION] IP Clearance on code donations [Was: Re: Graduation?]
Posted by Niels van Dijk <ni...@surfnet.nl>.
thanks, I'll take a look at it.
On 01/31/2012 10:48 AM, Ate Douma wrote:
> On 01/31/2012 09:42 AM, Niels van Dijk wrote:
>> Hi Ate,
>>
>> In the Jira ticket you show the result of a scan that tested for
>> potential isssues. Is it also possible to let such a scan actually list
>> the files it thinks are in error? that would already be a lot less work
>> that browse trough all source code.
>
> I don't think rat can be configured to only report potential issues,
> however it took me 2 minutes to strip down the report for surfconext
> only (potential) issues, see the new attachment I've added to
> RAVE-450, including my remarks what I stripped. If you consider
> dropping (deleting) the older tags, the report now is down to less
> than 300 lines :)
>
> BTW: I just noticed that the trunk/pom.xml refers to a parent
> coin-portal-parent:1.0.3-SNAPSHOT:pom which seems never have been
> contributed. Not that might be important, but maybe good to be aware of.
>
> Regards, Ate
>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Niels
>>
>> On 01/30/2012 01:40 AM, Ate Douma wrote:
>>> On 01/16/2012 07:08 PM, Ate Douma wrote:
>>>> On 01/16/2012 05:12 PM, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote:
>>>>> On 1/16/12 10:56 AM, "Ross Gardler"<rg...@opendirective.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> * Check and make sure that the files that have been donated have
>>>>>>> been
>>>>>>> updated to reflect the new ASF copyright.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Already done, surely?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I am not sure about all three donations. We should probably double
>>>>> checkŠ
>>>>
>>>> Yes, we need to make sure. I think I went through that in the
>>>> beginning, but its
>>>> too long ago already to recall if it was complete(d).
>>>>
>>>> I'll volunteer doing the due diligence on this one, although it might
>>>> take me a
>>>> few days before I find time to do so.
>>>> I will create a JIRA ticket for this.
>>>>
>>> Please see my follow up on
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RAVE-425
>>>
>>> I think we've got still quite some work on our place for this ...
>>>
>>> As I wrote in the issue, this is something we (the Mentors) clearly
>>> dropped the ball on and should have followed up long time ago already,
>>> for which I'd like to apologize for not doing so.
>>>
>>> I tried to provide a set of steps we can follow to resolve this, but
>>> for myself this also is something I haven't dealt with before, so I'd
>>> like the other mentors to chime in as well what they think should be
>>> the right way to proceed.
>>>
>>> If needed we can consult the other IPMC members to help us out too as
>>> there should be plenty of experience with these things.
>>>
>>> And I'm definitely willing to help out directly, with whatever is
>>> needed to speed this up, just let me know.
>>>
>>> Regards, Ate
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
Re: [DISCUSSION] IP Clearance on code donations [Was: Re: Graduation?]
Posted by Ate Douma <at...@douma.nu>.
On 01/31/2012 09:42 AM, Niels van Dijk wrote:
> Hi Ate,
>
> In the Jira ticket you show the result of a scan that tested for
> potential isssues. Is it also possible to let such a scan actually list
> the files it thinks are in error? that would already be a lot less work
> that browse trough all source code.
I don't think rat can be configured to only report potential issues, however it
took me 2 minutes to strip down the report for surfconext only (potential)
issues, see the new attachment I've added to RAVE-450, including my remarks what
I stripped. If you consider dropping (deleting) the older tags, the report now
is down to less than 300 lines :)
BTW: I just noticed that the trunk/pom.xml refers to a parent
coin-portal-parent:1.0.3-SNAPSHOT:pom which seems never have been contributed.
Not that might be important, but maybe good to be aware of.
Regards, Ate
>
> Cheers,
> Niels
>
> On 01/30/2012 01:40 AM, Ate Douma wrote:
>> On 01/16/2012 07:08 PM, Ate Douma wrote:
>>> On 01/16/2012 05:12 PM, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote:
>>>> On 1/16/12 10:56 AM, "Ross Gardler"<rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> * Check and make sure that the files that have been donated have been
>>>>>> updated to reflect the new ASF copyright.
>>>>>
>>>>> Already done, surely?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I am not sure about all three donations. We should probably double
>>>> checkŠ
>>>
>>> Yes, we need to make sure. I think I went through that in the
>>> beginning, but its
>>> too long ago already to recall if it was complete(d).
>>>
>>> I'll volunteer doing the due diligence on this one, although it might
>>> take me a
>>> few days before I find time to do so.
>>> I will create a JIRA ticket for this.
>>>
>> Please see my follow up on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RAVE-425
>>
>> I think we've got still quite some work on our place for this ...
>>
>> As I wrote in the issue, this is something we (the Mentors) clearly
>> dropped the ball on and should have followed up long time ago already,
>> for which I'd like to apologize for not doing so.
>>
>> I tried to provide a set of steps we can follow to resolve this, but
>> for myself this also is something I haven't dealt with before, so I'd
>> like the other mentors to chime in as well what they think should be
>> the right way to proceed.
>>
>> If needed we can consult the other IPMC members to help us out too as
>> there should be plenty of experience with these things.
>>
>> And I'm definitely willing to help out directly, with whatever is
>> needed to speed this up, just let me know.
>>
>> Regards, Ate
>>
>>
>>
Re: [DISCUSSION] IP Clearance on code donations [Was: Re: Graduation?]
Posted by Niels van Dijk <ni...@surfnet.nl>.
Hi Ate,
In the Jira ticket you show the result of a scan that tested for
potential isssues. Is it also possible to let such a scan actually list
the files it thinks are in error? that would already be a lot less work
that browse trough all source code.
Cheers,
Niels
On 01/30/2012 01:40 AM, Ate Douma wrote:
> On 01/16/2012 07:08 PM, Ate Douma wrote:
>> On 01/16/2012 05:12 PM, Franklin, Matthew B. wrote:
>>> On 1/16/12 10:56 AM, "Ross Gardler"<rg...@opendirective.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> * Check and make sure that the files that have been donated have been
>>>>> updated to reflect the new ASF copyright.
>>>>
>>>> Already done, surely?
>>>
>>>
>>> I am not sure about all three donations. We should probably double
>>> checkŠ
>>
>> Yes, we need to make sure. I think I went through that in the
>> beginning, but its
>> too long ago already to recall if it was complete(d).
>>
>> I'll volunteer doing the due diligence on this one, although it might
>> take me a
>> few days before I find time to do so.
>> I will create a JIRA ticket for this.
>>
> Please see my follow up on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/RAVE-425
>
> I think we've got still quite some work on our place for this ...
>
> As I wrote in the issue, this is something we (the Mentors) clearly
> dropped the ball on and should have followed up long time ago already,
> for which I'd like to apologize for not doing so.
>
> I tried to provide a set of steps we can follow to resolve this, but
> for myself this also is something I haven't dealt with before, so I'd
> like the other mentors to chime in as well what they think should be
> the right way to proceed.
>
> If needed we can consult the other IPMC members to help us out too as
> there should be plenty of experience with these things.
>
> And I'm definitely willing to help out directly, with whatever is
> needed to speed this up, just let me know.
>
> Regards, Ate
>
>
>