You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by tison <wa...@gmail.com> on 2022/04/24 22:46:01 UTC
Multiple entities of software grant agreement
Hi IPMCs,
Recently we voted and accepted Kvrocks to the Incubator[1].
While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA, we meet an issue that the
original entity sign a SGA but explicit limit the agreement on code from
2018 to 2020.
Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on belong to the Kvrocks
community.
The issue is that since the original entity sign such a SGA and all core
contributors sign ICLAs, is there other agreements should be signed for
podling IP Clearance?
Best,
tison.
[1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/shxcg56j3x36t75x63voj82s6hhdtrcv
Re: Multiple entities of software grant agreement
Posted by hulk <hu...@gmail.com>.
Thanks Matt. For ICLAs, some guys fill the postal address with the company
address instead of the personal address, would check with them.
On Tue, Apr 26, 2022 at 1:09 AM Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> And we've filed the SGA. The ICLAs are still churning as each
> submitter learns what data is required on the form, though. ;)
>
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 7:49 AM hulk <hu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Many thanks for John's help. I think we can handle it with this input,
> > thanks a lot.
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 8:06 PM John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 5:08 AM Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > SGA is not required if the project is on a personal repository, this
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > SGAs can apply for individuals and corporations [1]. Doesn't matter
> > > where it's sourced from. We have received a number of SGAs in the past
> > > that just represent a single individual, or non incorporated entities
> that
> > > choose to be represented by a single person (see Groovy as an example).
> > >
> > >
> > > > individual's employer(if have) is recommended to submit CCLA(but
> needs
> > > > to evaluate by the owner about his contract)
> > > >
> > >
> > > The CCLA is really for the case where the employer explicitly wants an
> > > agreement in place indicating the contributor can contribute the
> code. I'm
> > > not aware of any policy we have (at Apache) requiring it. [2]
> > >
> > > More comments below specific to kvrocks.
> > >
> > >
> > > > But this isn't the Kvrocks case.
> > > >
> > > > Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > > Twitter, wusheng1108
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > tison <wa...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 16:15写道：
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for your inputs.
> > > > >
> > > > > Try to summarize the discussion:
> > > > >
> > > > > * Apache requires a SGA from the *current* copyright holder of the
> > > > software
> > > > > to grant permission for ASF.
> > > >
> > >
> > > We don't actually (at least not always but it does tend to be the
> easiest
> > > way to deal with it since most incubating projects are changing
> license).
> > > Work with your mentors/champion to figure this out, but if a large
> enough
> > > set of ICLAs is done to cover all main contributions and the source
> code is
> > > already Apache licensed then you may be fine.
> > >
> > >
> > > > > * If the current copyright holder is Meitu, then they should sign a
> > > grant
> > > > > with Exhibit A barely "Kvrocks".
> > > > >
> > > > > However, if the current copyright holder is "Kvrocks contributors",
> > > since
> > > > > it's a virtual entity, a certain contributor on behalf of the
> community
> > > > > should sign the SGA.
> > > > >
> > > > > Did I get it right? Is there some other proposal that got into the
> > > > > incubator without a SGA from a certain "company".
> > > >
> > >
> > > To answer this, you need to understand what the SGA is saying; IANAL.
> > > Section 2 makes the assumption that the grantor has permissions to be
> the
> > > grantor. When Meitu granted the source code, they gave whoever full
> rights
> > > to do whatever the grant said they can do. It wouldn't be correct to
> ask
> > > Meitu to file another grant, but whoever is filing the grant should
> ensure
> > > that what they are doing (Section 1 of the SGA) is in compliance with
> that
> > > grant, which would satisfy Section 2. I'm assuming that KvrocksLabs
> isn't
> > > a business entity, just an unincorporated group of individuals working
> on
> > > the project. It's fairly common that opensource projects merge code
> > > together, I'm not sure the state of KvrocksLabs before the grant that
> Meitu
> > > gave.
> > >
> > > TL;DR I believe someone representing KvrocksLabs can sign a SGA with
> the
> > > assumption that the original grant from Meitu created KvrocksLabs.
> Ideally
> > > that person should be whoever received the grant from Meitu.
> > >
> > >
> > > [1]:
> https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html#grants
> > > [2]: https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html#clas
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > tison.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 15:42写道：
> > > > >
> > > > > > > but I think it's right that meitu should claim clearly about
> the
> > > > > > copyright
> > > > > > date since the
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Do you mean there is no single Meitu employee(s) was
> > > > > > working/contributed to that project ever since?
> > > > > > Because the org is virtual on GitHub, and meitu can't sign CCLA
> or
> > > SGA
> > > > > > to that virtual group back then, I think one way or another,
> Meitu
> > > > > > still need to prove the SGA from the transfer date to now.
> > > > > > It is better for meitu to sign the SGA to declare all
> > > > > > contributions(from beginning to now), others(individuals) would
> > > submit
> > > > > > their ICLA(or other companies' SGA) for some codes after the
> > > transfer.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > > > > Twitter, wusheng1108
> > > > > >
> > > > > > hulk <hu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 15:06写道：
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks for junping reply.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Yes, we also agree that should grant the whole source code
> > > > repository
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > > ASF,
> > > > > > > but I think it's right that meitu should claim clearly about
> the
> > > > > > copyright
> > > > > > > date since the
> > > > > > > the repository was moved to another organization after then.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So our question is should we need to sign extra other
> agreements
> > > for
> > > > > > > podling IP Clearance?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 2:57 PM 俊平堵 <ju...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think SGA here should be the same as other project.
> > > > > > > > As Craig mentioned above, it is code’s copyright owner ( a
> legal
> > > > > > entity or
> > > > > > > > natural human) to grant permission for ASF. If only for code
> > > during
> > > > > > certain
> > > > > > > > period, that means some code is not get permitted for Apache
> > > which
> > > > is
> > > > > > very
> > > > > > > > weird. :(
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > hulk <hu...@gmail.com>于2022年4月25日 周一上午11:52写道：
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Thanks all,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > From the meitu side, they think should claim the date
> clearly
> > > > > > instead of
> > > > > > > > > implicitly,
> > > > > > > > > so I'm not sure whether is ok to add this clarification on
> SGA
> > > or
> > > > > > not?
> > > > > > > > > If not, are there other agreements that should be signed
> for
> > > > podling
> > > > > > IP
> > > > > > > > > Clearance?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 11:13 AM Sheng Wu <
> > > > wu.sheng.841108@gmail.com
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Please check the SGA template of ASF, like Craig
> mentioned,
> > > > > > usually,
> > > > > > > > > > there is no date/timestamp included.
> > > > > > > > > > The foundation just needs legal approval that the company
> > > > granted
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > move codes to the foundation, others(like individuals)
> should
> > > > > > submit
> > > > > > > > > > ICLA(s)
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > > > > > > > > Twitter, wusheng1108
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > hulk <hu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 10:19写道：
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > I think the key is how they make this conclusion.
> Was the
> > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > > > > > moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the
> owner
> > > > from a
> > > > > > > > > > > > license perspective?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Kvrocks has transferred from the meitu to the
> KvrocksLabs
> > > > > > > > organization
> > > > > > > > > > and claimed the copyright belongs to the Kvrocks
> community.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > Is there a place/way to track this event?
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > We didn't track this event in a public place. The
> lawyer
> > > > thinks
> > > > > > they
> > > > > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > > > only grant the copyright when all of the contributors are
> > > their
> > > > > > > > employees
> > > > > > > > > > (before 2020.3.23). After that, the copyright should
> belong
> > > to
> > > > the
> > > > > > > > > Kvrocks
> > > > > > > > > > community.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 8:29 AM Sheng Wu <
> > > > > > wu.sheng.841108@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >> I think IPMC don't prepare SGA, SGA(s) are from
> original
> > > > owners.
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on
> > > > belong
> > > > > > to the
> > > > > > > > > > Kvrocks
> > > > > > > > > > >> community.
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >> I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was
> the
> > > > > > project
> > > > > > > > > > >> moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the
> owner
> > > > from a
> > > > > > > > > > >> license perspective? Is there a place/way to track
> this
> > > > event?
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >> Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > > > > > > > > >> Twitter, wusheng1108
> > > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > > >> tison <wa...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 06:46写道：
> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > >> > Hi IPMCs,
> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > >> > Recently we voted and accepted Kvrocks to the
> > > > Incubator[1].
> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA, we
> meet an
> > > > issue
> > > > > > that
> > > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > >> > original entity sign a SGA but explicit limit the
> > > > agreement on
> > > > > > > > code
> > > > > > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > > > >> > 2018 to 2020.
> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on
> > > > belong
> > > > > > to the
> > > > > > > > > > Kvrocks
> > > > > > > > > > >> > community.
> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > >> > The issue is that since the original entity sign
> such a
> > > > SGA
> > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > all
> > > > > > > > > > core
> > > > > > > > > > >> > contributors sign ICLAs, is there other agreements
> > > should
> > > > be
> > > > > > > > signed
> > > > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > >> > podling IP Clearance?
> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > >> > Best,
> > > > > > > > > > >> > tison.
> > > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > > >> > [1]
> > > > > > > > >
> > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/shxcg56j3x36t75x63voj82s6hhdtrcv
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > > 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: Multiple entities of software grant agreement
Posted by Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>.
And we've filed the SGA. The ICLAs are still churning as each
submitter learns what data is required on the form, though. ;)
On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 7:49 AM hulk <hu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Many thanks for John's help. I think we can handle it with this input,
> thanks a lot.
>
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 8:06 PM John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 5:08 AM Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > SGA is not required if the project is on a personal repository, this
> > >
> >
> >
> > SGAs can apply for individuals and corporations [1]. Doesn't matter
> > where it's sourced from. We have received a number of SGAs in the past
> > that just represent a single individual, or non incorporated entities that
> > choose to be represented by a single person (see Groovy as an example).
> >
> >
> > > individual's employer(if have) is recommended to submit CCLA(but needs
> > > to evaluate by the owner about his contract)
> > >
> >
> > The CCLA is really for the case where the employer explicitly wants an
> > agreement in place indicating the contributor can contribute the code. I'm
> > not aware of any policy we have (at Apache) requiring it. [2]
> >
> > More comments below specific to kvrocks.
> >
> >
> > > But this isn't the Kvrocks case.
> > >
> > > Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > Twitter, wusheng1108
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >
> > > tison <wa...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 16:15写道：
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for your inputs.
> > > >
> > > > Try to summarize the discussion:
> > > >
> > > > * Apache requires a SGA from the *current* copyright holder of the
> > > software
> > > > to grant permission for ASF.
> > >
> >
> > We don't actually (at least not always but it does tend to be the easiest
> > way to deal with it since most incubating projects are changing license).
> > Work with your mentors/champion to figure this out, but if a large enough
> > set of ICLAs is done to cover all main contributions and the source code is
> > already Apache licensed then you may be fine.
> >
> >
> > > > * If the current copyright holder is Meitu, then they should sign a
> > grant
> > > > with Exhibit A barely "Kvrocks".
> > > >
> > > > However, if the current copyright holder is "Kvrocks contributors",
> > since
> > > > it's a virtual entity, a certain contributor on behalf of the community
> > > > should sign the SGA.
> > > >
> > > > Did I get it right? Is there some other proposal that got into the
> > > > incubator without a SGA from a certain "company".
> > >
> >
> > To answer this, you need to understand what the SGA is saying; IANAL.
> > Section 2 makes the assumption that the grantor has permissions to be the
> > grantor. When Meitu granted the source code, they gave whoever full rights
> > to do whatever the grant said they can do. It wouldn't be correct to ask
> > Meitu to file another grant, but whoever is filing the grant should ensure
> > that what they are doing (Section 1 of the SGA) is in compliance with that
> > grant, which would satisfy Section 2. I'm assuming that KvrocksLabs isn't
> > a business entity, just an unincorporated group of individuals working on
> > the project. It's fairly common that opensource projects merge code
> > together, I'm not sure the state of KvrocksLabs before the grant that Meitu
> > gave.
> >
> > TL;DR I believe someone representing KvrocksLabs can sign a SGA with the
> > assumption that the original grant from Meitu created KvrocksLabs. Ideally
> > that person should be whoever received the grant from Meitu.
> >
> >
> > [1]: https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html#grants
> > [2]: https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html#clas
> >
> >
> >
> > > >
> > > > Best,
> > > > tison.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 15:42写道：
> > > >
> > > > > > but I think it's right that meitu should claim clearly about the
> > > > > copyright
> > > > > date since the
> > > > >
> > > > > Do you mean there is no single Meitu employee(s) was
> > > > > working/contributed to that project ever since?
> > > > > Because the org is virtual on GitHub, and meitu can't sign CCLA or
> > SGA
> > > > > to that virtual group back then, I think one way or another, Meitu
> > > > > still need to prove the SGA from the transfer date to now.
> > > > > It is better for meitu to sign the SGA to declare all
> > > > > contributions(from beginning to now), others(individuals) would
> > submit
> > > > > their ICLA(or other companies' SGA) for some codes after the
> > transfer.
> > > > >
> > > > > Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > > > Twitter, wusheng1108
> > > > >
> > > > > hulk <hu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 15:06写道：
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks for junping reply.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Yes, we also agree that should grant the whole source code
> > > repository
> > > > > for
> > > > > > ASF,
> > > > > > but I think it's right that meitu should claim clearly about the
> > > > > copyright
> > > > > > date since the
> > > > > > the repository was moved to another organization after then.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So our question is should we need to sign extra other agreements
> > for
> > > > > > podling IP Clearance?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 2:57 PM 俊平堵 <ju...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think SGA here should be the same as other project.
> > > > > > > As Craig mentioned above, it is code’s copyright owner ( a legal
> > > > > entity or
> > > > > > > natural human) to grant permission for ASF. If only for code
> > during
> > > > > certain
> > > > > > > period, that means some code is not get permitted for Apache
> > which
> > > is
> > > > > very
> > > > > > > weird. :(
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > hulk <hu...@gmail.com>于2022年4月25日 周一上午11:52写道：
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thanks all,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > From the meitu side, they think should claim the date clearly
> > > > > instead of
> > > > > > > > implicitly,
> > > > > > > > so I'm not sure whether is ok to add this clarification on SGA
> > or
> > > > > not?
> > > > > > > > If not, are there other agreements that should be signed for
> > > podling
> > > > > IP
> > > > > > > > Clearance?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 11:13 AM Sheng Wu <
> > > wu.sheng.841108@gmail.com
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Please check the SGA template of ASF, like Craig mentioned,
> > > > > usually,
> > > > > > > > > there is no date/timestamp included.
> > > > > > > > > The foundation just needs legal approval that the company
> > > granted
> > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > move codes to the foundation, others(like individuals) should
> > > > > submit
> > > > > > > > > ICLA(s)
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > > > > > > > Twitter, wusheng1108
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > hulk <hu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 10:19写道：
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the
> > > > > project
> > > > > > > > > > > moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner
> > > from a
> > > > > > > > > > > license perspective?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Kvrocks has transferred from the meitu to the KvrocksLabs
> > > > > > > organization
> > > > > > > > > and claimed the copyright belongs to the Kvrocks community.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Is there a place/way to track this event?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > We didn't track this event in a public place. The lawyer
> > > thinks
> > > > > they
> > > > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > > only grant the copyright when all of the contributors are
> > their
> > > > > > > employees
> > > > > > > > > (before 2020.3.23). After that, the copyright should belong
> > to
> > > the
> > > > > > > > Kvrocks
> > > > > > > > > community.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 8:29 AM Sheng Wu <
> > > > > wu.sheng.841108@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> I think IPMC don't prepare SGA, SGA(s) are from original
> > > owners.
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on
> > > belong
> > > > > to the
> > > > > > > > > Kvrocks
> > > > > > > > > >> community.
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the
> > > > > project
> > > > > > > > > >> moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner
> > > from a
> > > > > > > > > >> license perspective? Is there a place/way to track this
> > > event?
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > > > > > > > >> Twitter, wusheng1108
> > > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > > >> tison <wa...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 06:46写道：
> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > >> > Hi IPMCs,
> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > >> > Recently we voted and accepted Kvrocks to the
> > > Incubator[1].
> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA, we meet an
> > > issue
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > >> > original entity sign a SGA but explicit limit the
> > > agreement on
> > > > > > > code
> > > > > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > > >> > 2018 to 2020.
> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on
> > > belong
> > > > > to the
> > > > > > > > > Kvrocks
> > > > > > > > > >> > community.
> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > >> > The issue is that since the original entity sign such a
> > > SGA
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > all
> > > > > > > > > core
> > > > > > > > > >> > contributors sign ICLAs, is there other agreements
> > should
> > > be
> > > > > > > signed
> > > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > >> > podling IP Clearance?
> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > >> > Best,
> > > > > > > > > >> > tison.
> > > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > > >> > [1]
> > > > > > > >
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread/shxcg56j3x36t75x63voj82s6hhdtrcv
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > 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: Multiple entities of software grant agreement
Posted by hulk <hu...@gmail.com>.
Many thanks for John's help. I think we can handle it with this input,
thanks a lot.
On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 8:06 PM John D. Ament <jo...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 5:08 AM Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > SGA is not required if the project is on a personal repository, this
> >
>
>
> SGAs can apply for individuals and corporations [1]. Doesn't matter
> where it's sourced from. We have received a number of SGAs in the past
> that just represent a single individual, or non incorporated entities that
> choose to be represented by a single person (see Groovy as an example).
>
>
> > individual's employer(if have) is recommended to submit CCLA(but needs
> > to evaluate by the owner about his contract)
> >
>
> The CCLA is really for the case where the employer explicitly wants an
> agreement in place indicating the contributor can contribute the code. I'm
> not aware of any policy we have (at Apache) requiring it. [2]
>
> More comments below specific to kvrocks.
>
>
> > But this isn't the Kvrocks case.
> >
> > Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > Twitter, wusheng1108
> >
>
>
>
>
>
> >
> > tison <wa...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 16:15写道：
> > >
> > > Thanks for your inputs.
> > >
> > > Try to summarize the discussion:
> > >
> > > * Apache requires a SGA from the *current* copyright holder of the
> > software
> > > to grant permission for ASF.
> >
>
> We don't actually (at least not always but it does tend to be the easiest
> way to deal with it since most incubating projects are changing license).
> Work with your mentors/champion to figure this out, but if a large enough
> set of ICLAs is done to cover all main contributions and the source code is
> already Apache licensed then you may be fine.
>
>
> > > * If the current copyright holder is Meitu, then they should sign a
> grant
> > > with Exhibit A barely "Kvrocks".
> > >
> > > However, if the current copyright holder is "Kvrocks contributors",
> since
> > > it's a virtual entity, a certain contributor on behalf of the community
> > > should sign the SGA.
> > >
> > > Did I get it right? Is there some other proposal that got into the
> > > incubator without a SGA from a certain "company".
> >
>
> To answer this, you need to understand what the SGA is saying; IANAL.
> Section 2 makes the assumption that the grantor has permissions to be the
> grantor. When Meitu granted the source code, they gave whoever full rights
> to do whatever the grant said they can do. It wouldn't be correct to ask
> Meitu to file another grant, but whoever is filing the grant should ensure
> that what they are doing (Section 1 of the SGA) is in compliance with that
> grant, which would satisfy Section 2. I'm assuming that KvrocksLabs isn't
> a business entity, just an unincorporated group of individuals working on
> the project. It's fairly common that opensource projects merge code
> together, I'm not sure the state of KvrocksLabs before the grant that Meitu
> gave.
>
> TL;DR I believe someone representing KvrocksLabs can sign a SGA with the
> assumption that the original grant from Meitu created KvrocksLabs. Ideally
> that person should be whoever received the grant from Meitu.
>
>
> [1]: https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html#grants
> [2]: https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html#clas
>
>
>
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > tison.
> > >
> > >
> > > Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 15:42写道：
> > >
> > > > > but I think it's right that meitu should claim clearly about the
> > > > copyright
> > > > date since the
> > > >
> > > > Do you mean there is no single Meitu employee(s) was
> > > > working/contributed to that project ever since?
> > > > Because the org is virtual on GitHub, and meitu can't sign CCLA or
> SGA
> > > > to that virtual group back then, I think one way or another, Meitu
> > > > still need to prove the SGA from the transfer date to now.
> > > > It is better for meitu to sign the SGA to declare all
> > > > contributions(from beginning to now), others(individuals) would
> submit
> > > > their ICLA(or other companies' SGA) for some codes after the
> transfer.
> > > >
> > > > Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > > Twitter, wusheng1108
> > > >
> > > > hulk <hu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 15:06写道：
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for junping reply.
> > > > >
> > > > > Yes, we also agree that should grant the whole source code
> > repository
> > > > for
> > > > > ASF,
> > > > > but I think it's right that meitu should claim clearly about the
> > > > copyright
> > > > > date since the
> > > > > the repository was moved to another organization after then.
> > > > >
> > > > > So our question is should we need to sign extra other agreements
> for
> > > > > podling IP Clearance?
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 2:57 PM 俊平堵 <ju...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > I think SGA here should be the same as other project.
> > > > > > As Craig mentioned above, it is code’s copyright owner ( a legal
> > > > entity or
> > > > > > natural human) to grant permission for ASF. If only for code
> during
> > > > certain
> > > > > > period, that means some code is not get permitted for Apache
> which
> > is
> > > > very
> > > > > > weird. :(
> > > > > >
> > > > > > hulk <hu...@gmail.com>于2022年4月25日 周一上午11:52写道：
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks all,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > From the meitu side, they think should claim the date clearly
> > > > instead of
> > > > > > > implicitly,
> > > > > > > so I'm not sure whether is ok to add this clarification on SGA
> or
> > > > not?
> > > > > > > If not, are there other agreements that should be signed for
> > podling
> > > > IP
> > > > > > > Clearance?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 11:13 AM Sheng Wu <
> > wu.sheng.841108@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Please check the SGA template of ASF, like Craig mentioned,
> > > > usually,
> > > > > > > > there is no date/timestamp included.
> > > > > > > > The foundation just needs legal approval that the company
> > granted
> > > > to
> > > > > > > > move codes to the foundation, others(like individuals) should
> > > > submit
> > > > > > > > ICLA(s)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > > > > > > Twitter, wusheng1108
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > hulk <hu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 10:19写道：
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the
> > > > project
> > > > > > > > > > moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner
> > from a
> > > > > > > > > > license perspective?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Kvrocks has transferred from the meitu to the KvrocksLabs
> > > > > > organization
> > > > > > > > and claimed the copyright belongs to the Kvrocks community.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Is there a place/way to track this event?
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > We didn't track this event in a public place. The lawyer
> > thinks
> > > > they
> > > > > > > can
> > > > > > > > only grant the copyright when all of the contributors are
> their
> > > > > > employees
> > > > > > > > (before 2020.3.23). After that, the copyright should belong
> to
> > the
> > > > > > > Kvrocks
> > > > > > > > community.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 8:29 AM Sheng Wu <
> > > > wu.sheng.841108@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> I think IPMC don't prepare SGA, SGA(s) are from original
> > owners.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on
> > belong
> > > > to the
> > > > > > > > Kvrocks
> > > > > > > > >> community.
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the
> > > > project
> > > > > > > > >> moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner
> > from a
> > > > > > > > >> license perspective? Is there a place/way to track this
> > event?
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > > > > > > >> Twitter, wusheng1108
> > > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > > >> tison <wa...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 06:46写道：
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > Hi IPMCs,
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > Recently we voted and accepted Kvrocks to the
> > Incubator[1].
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA, we meet an
> > issue
> > > > that
> > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > >> > original entity sign a SGA but explicit limit the
> > agreement on
> > > > > > code
> > > > > > > > from
> > > > > > > > >> > 2018 to 2020.
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on
> > belong
> > > > to the
> > > > > > > > Kvrocks
> > > > > > > > >> > community.
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > The issue is that since the original entity sign such a
> > SGA
> > > > and
> > > > > > all
> > > > > > > > core
> > > > > > > > >> > contributors sign ICLAs, is there other agreements
> should
> > be
> > > > > > signed
> > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > >> > podling IP Clearance?
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > Best,
> > > > > > > > >> > tison.
> > > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > > >> > [1]
> > > > > > >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/shxcg56j3x36t75x63voj82s6hhdtrcv
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > 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: Multiple entities of software grant agreement
Posted by "John D. Ament" <jo...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 5:08 AM Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> SGA is not required if the project is on a personal repository, this
>
SGAs can apply for individuals and corporations [1]. Doesn't matter
where it's sourced from. We have received a number of SGAs in the past
that just represent a single individual, or non incorporated entities that
choose to be represented by a single person (see Groovy as an example).
> individual's employer(if have) is recommended to submit CCLA(but needs
> to evaluate by the owner about his contract)
>
The CCLA is really for the case where the employer explicitly wants an
agreement in place indicating the contributor can contribute the code. I'm
not aware of any policy we have (at Apache) requiring it. [2]
More comments below specific to kvrocks.
> But this isn't the Kvrocks case.
>
> Sheng Wu 吴晟
> Twitter, wusheng1108
>
>
> tison <wa...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 16:15写道：
> >
> > Thanks for your inputs.
> >
> > Try to summarize the discussion:
> >
> > * Apache requires a SGA from the *current* copyright holder of the
> software
> > to grant permission for ASF.
>
We don't actually (at least not always but it does tend to be the easiest
way to deal with it since most incubating projects are changing license).
Work with your mentors/champion to figure this out, but if a large enough
set of ICLAs is done to cover all main contributions and the source code is
already Apache licensed then you may be fine.
> > * If the current copyright holder is Meitu, then they should sign a grant
> > with Exhibit A barely "Kvrocks".
> >
> > However, if the current copyright holder is "Kvrocks contributors", since
> > it's a virtual entity, a certain contributor on behalf of the community
> > should sign the SGA.
> >
> > Did I get it right? Is there some other proposal that got into the
> > incubator without a SGA from a certain "company".
>
To answer this, you need to understand what the SGA is saying; IANAL.
Section 2 makes the assumption that the grantor has permissions to be the
grantor. When Meitu granted the source code, they gave whoever full rights
to do whatever the grant said they can do. It wouldn't be correct to ask
Meitu to file another grant, but whoever is filing the grant should ensure
that what they are doing (Section 1 of the SGA) is in compliance with that
grant, which would satisfy Section 2. I'm assuming that KvrocksLabs isn't
a business entity, just an unincorporated group of individuals working on
the project. It's fairly common that opensource projects merge code
together, I'm not sure the state of KvrocksLabs before the grant that Meitu
gave.
TL;DR I believe someone representing KvrocksLabs can sign a SGA with the
assumption that the original grant from Meitu created KvrocksLabs. Ideally
that person should be whoever received the grant from Meitu.
[1]: https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html#grants
[2]: https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html#clas
> >
> > Best,
> > tison.
> >
> >
> > Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 15:42写道：
> >
> > > > but I think it's right that meitu should claim clearly about the
> > > copyright
> > > date since the
> > >
> > > Do you mean there is no single Meitu employee(s) was
> > > working/contributed to that project ever since?
> > > Because the org is virtual on GitHub, and meitu can't sign CCLA or SGA
> > > to that virtual group back then, I think one way or another, Meitu
> > > still need to prove the SGA from the transfer date to now.
> > > It is better for meitu to sign the SGA to declare all
> > > contributions(from beginning to now), others(individuals) would submit
> > > their ICLA(or other companies' SGA) for some codes after the transfer.
> > >
> > > Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > Twitter, wusheng1108
> > >
> > > hulk <hu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 15:06写道：
> > > >
> > > > Thanks for junping reply.
> > > >
> > > > Yes, we also agree that should grant the whole source code
> repository
> > > for
> > > > ASF,
> > > > but I think it's right that meitu should claim clearly about the
> > > copyright
> > > > date since the
> > > > the repository was moved to another organization after then.
> > > >
> > > > So our question is should we need to sign extra other agreements for
> > > > podling IP Clearance?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 2:57 PM 俊平堵 <ju...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I think SGA here should be the same as other project.
> > > > > As Craig mentioned above, it is code’s copyright owner ( a legal
> > > entity or
> > > > > natural human) to grant permission for ASF. If only for code during
> > > certain
> > > > > period, that means some code is not get permitted for Apache which
> is
> > > very
> > > > > weird. :(
> > > > >
> > > > > hulk <hu...@gmail.com>于2022年4月25日 周一上午11:52写道：
> > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks all,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > From the meitu side, they think should claim the date clearly
> > > instead of
> > > > > > implicitly,
> > > > > > so I'm not sure whether is ok to add this clarification on SGA or
> > > not?
> > > > > > If not, are there other agreements that should be signed for
> podling
> > > IP
> > > > > > Clearance?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 11:13 AM Sheng Wu <
> wu.sheng.841108@gmail.com
> > > >
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Please check the SGA template of ASF, like Craig mentioned,
> > > usually,
> > > > > > > there is no date/timestamp included.
> > > > > > > The foundation just needs legal approval that the company
> granted
> > > to
> > > > > > > move codes to the foundation, others(like individuals) should
> > > submit
> > > > > > > ICLA(s)
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > > > > > Twitter, wusheng1108
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > hulk <hu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 10:19写道：
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the
> > > project
> > > > > > > > > moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner
> from a
> > > > > > > > > license perspective?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Kvrocks has transferred from the meitu to the KvrocksLabs
> > > > > organization
> > > > > > > and claimed the copyright belongs to the Kvrocks community.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Is there a place/way to track this event?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > We didn't track this event in a public place. The lawyer
> thinks
> > > they
> > > > > > can
> > > > > > > only grant the copyright when all of the contributors are their
> > > > > employees
> > > > > > > (before 2020.3.23). After that, the copyright should belong to
> the
> > > > > > Kvrocks
> > > > > > > community.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 8:29 AM Sheng Wu <
> > > wu.sheng.841108@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> I think IPMC don't prepare SGA, SGA(s) are from original
> owners.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on
> belong
> > > to the
> > > > > > > Kvrocks
> > > > > > > >> community.
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the
> > > project
> > > > > > > >> moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner
> from a
> > > > > > > >> license perspective? Is there a place/way to track this
> event?
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > > > > > >> Twitter, wusheng1108
> > > > > > > >>
> > > > > > > >> tison <wa...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 06:46写道：
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > Hi IPMCs,
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > Recently we voted and accepted Kvrocks to the
> Incubator[1].
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA, we meet an
> issue
> > > that
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > >> > original entity sign a SGA but explicit limit the
> agreement on
> > > > > code
> > > > > > > from
> > > > > > > >> > 2018 to 2020.
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on
> belong
> > > to the
> > > > > > > Kvrocks
> > > > > > > >> > community.
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > The issue is that since the original entity sign such a
> SGA
> > > and
> > > > > all
> > > > > > > core
> > > > > > > >> > contributors sign ICLAs, is there other agreements should
> be
> > > > > signed
> > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > >> > podling IP Clearance?
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > Best,
> > > > > > > >> > tison.
> > > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > > >> > [1]
> > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/shxcg56j3x36t75x63voj82s6hhdtrcv
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 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: Multiple entities of software grant agreement
Posted by Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com>.
SGA is not required if the project is on a personal repository, this
individual's employer(if have) is recommended to submit CCLA(but needs
to evaluate by the owner about his contract)
But this isn't the Kvrocks case.
Sheng Wu 吴晟
Twitter, wusheng1108
tison <wa...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 16:15写道：
>
> Thanks for your inputs.
>
> Try to summarize the discussion:
>
> * Apache requires a SGA from the *current* copyright holder of the software
> to grant permission for ASF.
> * If the current copyright holder is Meitu, then they should sign a grant
> with Exhibit A barely "Kvrocks".
>
> However, if the current copyright holder is "Kvrocks contributors", since
> it's a virtual entity, a certain contributor on behalf of the community
> should sign the SGA.
>
> Did I get it right? Is there some other proposal that got into the
> incubator without a SGA from a certain "company".
>
> Best,
> tison.
>
>
> Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 15:42写道：
>
> > > but I think it's right that meitu should claim clearly about the
> > copyright
> > date since the
> >
> > Do you mean there is no single Meitu employee(s) was
> > working/contributed to that project ever since?
> > Because the org is virtual on GitHub, and meitu can't sign CCLA or SGA
> > to that virtual group back then, I think one way or another, Meitu
> > still need to prove the SGA from the transfer date to now.
> > It is better for meitu to sign the SGA to declare all
> > contributions(from beginning to now), others(individuals) would submit
> > their ICLA(or other companies' SGA) for some codes after the transfer.
> >
> > Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > Twitter, wusheng1108
> >
> > hulk <hu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 15:06写道：
> > >
> > > Thanks for junping reply.
> > >
> > > Yes, we also agree that should grant the whole source code repository
> > for
> > > ASF,
> > > but I think it's right that meitu should claim clearly about the
> > copyright
> > > date since the
> > > the repository was moved to another organization after then.
> > >
> > > So our question is should we need to sign extra other agreements for
> > > podling IP Clearance?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 2:57 PM 俊平堵 <ju...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > I think SGA here should be the same as other project.
> > > > As Craig mentioned above, it is code’s copyright owner ( a legal
> > entity or
> > > > natural human) to grant permission for ASF. If only for code during
> > certain
> > > > period, that means some code is not get permitted for Apache which is
> > very
> > > > weird. :(
> > > >
> > > > hulk <hu...@gmail.com>于2022年4月25日 周一上午11:52写道：
> > > >
> > > > > Thanks all,
> > > > >
> > > > > From the meitu side, they think should claim the date clearly
> > instead of
> > > > > implicitly,
> > > > > so I'm not sure whether is ok to add this clarification on SGA or
> > not?
> > > > > If not, are there other agreements that should be signed for podling
> > IP
> > > > > Clearance?
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 11:13 AM Sheng Wu <wu.sheng.841108@gmail.com
> > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Please check the SGA template of ASF, like Craig mentioned,
> > usually,
> > > > > > there is no date/timestamp included.
> > > > > > The foundation just needs legal approval that the company granted
> > to
> > > > > > move codes to the foundation, others(like individuals) should
> > submit
> > > > > > ICLA(s)
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > > > > Twitter, wusheng1108
> > > > > >
> > > > > > hulk <hu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 10:19写道：
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the
> > project
> > > > > > > > moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner from a
> > > > > > > > license perspective?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Kvrocks has transferred from the meitu to the KvrocksLabs
> > > > organization
> > > > > > and claimed the copyright belongs to the Kvrocks community.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Is there a place/way to track this event?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > We didn't track this event in a public place. The lawyer thinks
> > they
> > > > > can
> > > > > > only grant the copyright when all of the contributors are their
> > > > employees
> > > > > > (before 2020.3.23). After that, the copyright should belong to the
> > > > > Kvrocks
> > > > > > community.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 8:29 AM Sheng Wu <
> > wu.sheng.841108@gmail.com>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> I think IPMC don't prepare SGA, SGA(s) are from original owners.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on belong
> > to the
> > > > > > Kvrocks
> > > > > > >> community.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the
> > project
> > > > > > >> moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner from a
> > > > > > >> license perspective? Is there a place/way to track this event?
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > > > > >> Twitter, wusheng1108
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> tison <wa...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 06:46写道：
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > Hi IPMCs,
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > Recently we voted and accepted Kvrocks to the Incubator[1].
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA, we meet an issue
> > that
> > > > > the
> > > > > > >> > original entity sign a SGA but explicit limit the agreement on
> > > > code
> > > > > > from
> > > > > > >> > 2018 to 2020.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on belong
> > to the
> > > > > > Kvrocks
> > > > > > >> > community.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > The issue is that since the original entity sign such a SGA
> > and
> > > > all
> > > > > > core
> > > > > > >> > contributors sign ICLAs, is there other agreements should be
> > > > signed
> > > > > > for
> > > > > > >> > podling IP Clearance?
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > Best,
> > > > > > >> > tison.
> > > > > > >> >
> > > > > > >> > [1]
> > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/shxcg56j3x36t75x63voj82s6hhdtrcv
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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: Multiple entities of software grant agreement
Posted by tison <wa...@gmail.com>.
Thanks for your inputs.
Try to summarize the discussion:
* Apache requires a SGA from the *current* copyright holder of the software
to grant permission for ASF.
* If the current copyright holder is Meitu, then they should sign a grant
with Exhibit A barely "Kvrocks".
However, if the current copyright holder is "Kvrocks contributors", since
it's a virtual entity, a certain contributor on behalf of the community
should sign the SGA.
Did I get it right? Is there some other proposal that got into the
incubator without a SGA from a certain "company".
Best,
tison.
Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 15:42写道：
> > but I think it's right that meitu should claim clearly about the
> copyright
> date since the
>
> Do you mean there is no single Meitu employee(s) was
> working/contributed to that project ever since?
> Because the org is virtual on GitHub, and meitu can't sign CCLA or SGA
> to that virtual group back then, I think one way or another, Meitu
> still need to prove the SGA from the transfer date to now.
> It is better for meitu to sign the SGA to declare all
> contributions(from beginning to now), others(individuals) would submit
> their ICLA(or other companies' SGA) for some codes after the transfer.
>
> Sheng Wu 吴晟
> Twitter, wusheng1108
>
> hulk <hu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 15:06写道：
> >
> > Thanks for junping reply.
> >
> > Yes, we also agree that should grant the whole source code repository
> for
> > ASF,
> > but I think it's right that meitu should claim clearly about the
> copyright
> > date since the
> > the repository was moved to another organization after then.
> >
> > So our question is should we need to sign extra other agreements for
> > podling IP Clearance?
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 2:57 PM 俊平堵 <ju...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > I think SGA here should be the same as other project.
> > > As Craig mentioned above, it is code’s copyright owner ( a legal
> entity or
> > > natural human) to grant permission for ASF. If only for code during
> certain
> > > period, that means some code is not get permitted for Apache which is
> very
> > > weird. :(
> > >
> > > hulk <hu...@gmail.com>于2022年4月25日 周一上午11:52写道：
> > >
> > > > Thanks all,
> > > >
> > > > From the meitu side, they think should claim the date clearly
> instead of
> > > > implicitly,
> > > > so I'm not sure whether is ok to add this clarification on SGA or
> not?
> > > > If not, are there other agreements that should be signed for podling
> IP
> > > > Clearance?
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 11:13 AM Sheng Wu <wu.sheng.841108@gmail.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Please check the SGA template of ASF, like Craig mentioned,
> usually,
> > > > > there is no date/timestamp included.
> > > > > The foundation just needs legal approval that the company granted
> to
> > > > > move codes to the foundation, others(like individuals) should
> submit
> > > > > ICLA(s)
> > > > >
> > > > > Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > > > Twitter, wusheng1108
> > > > >
> > > > > hulk <hu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 10:19写道：
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the
> project
> > > > > > > moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner from a
> > > > > > > license perspective?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Kvrocks has transferred from the meitu to the KvrocksLabs
> > > organization
> > > > > and claimed the copyright belongs to the Kvrocks community.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Is there a place/way to track this event?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We didn't track this event in a public place. The lawyer thinks
> they
> > > > can
> > > > > only grant the copyright when all of the contributors are their
> > > employees
> > > > > (before 2020.3.23). After that, the copyright should belong to the
> > > > Kvrocks
> > > > > community.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 8:29 AM Sheng Wu <
> wu.sheng.841108@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I think IPMC don't prepare SGA, SGA(s) are from original owners.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on belong
> to the
> > > > > Kvrocks
> > > > > >> community.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the
> project
> > > > > >> moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner from a
> > > > > >> license perspective? Is there a place/way to track this event?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > > > >> Twitter, wusheng1108
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> tison <wa...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 06:46写道：
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > Hi IPMCs,
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > Recently we voted and accepted Kvrocks to the Incubator[1].
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA, we meet an issue
> that
> > > > the
> > > > > >> > original entity sign a SGA but explicit limit the agreement on
> > > code
> > > > > from
> > > > > >> > 2018 to 2020.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on belong
> to the
> > > > > Kvrocks
> > > > > >> > community.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > The issue is that since the original entity sign such a SGA
> and
> > > all
> > > > > core
> > > > > >> > contributors sign ICLAs, is there other agreements should be
> > > signed
> > > > > for
> > > > > >> > podling IP Clearance?
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > Best,
> > > > > >> > tison.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > [1]
> > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/shxcg56j3x36t75x63voj82s6hhdtrcv
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: Multiple entities of software grant agreement
Posted by hulk <hu...@gmail.com>.
Thanks Sheng Wu,
> Do you mean there is no single Meitu employee(s) was
working/contributed to that project ever since?
There are still some guys contributing to Kvrocks, but most contributions
were from the community,
I will discuss with the Metiu side about how to handle it.
On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 3:42 PM Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > but I think it's right that meitu should claim clearly about the
> copyright
> date since the
>
> Do you mean there is no single Meitu employee(s) was
> working/contributed to that project ever since?
> Because the org is virtual on GitHub, and meitu can't sign CCLA or SGA
> to that virtual group back then, I think one way or another, Meitu
> still need to prove the SGA from the transfer date to now.
> It is better for meitu to sign the SGA to declare all
> contributions(from beginning to now), others(individuals) would submit
> their ICLA(or other companies' SGA) for some codes after the transfer.
>
> Sheng Wu 吴晟
> Twitter, wusheng1108
>
> hulk <hu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 15:06写道：
> >
> > Thanks for junping reply.
> >
> > Yes, we also agree that should grant the whole source code repository
> for
> > ASF,
> > but I think it's right that meitu should claim clearly about the
> copyright
> > date since the
> > the repository was moved to another organization after then.
> >
> > So our question is should we need to sign extra other agreements for
> > podling IP Clearance?
> >
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 2:57 PM 俊平堵 <ju...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > I think SGA here should be the same as other project.
> > > As Craig mentioned above, it is code’s copyright owner ( a legal
> entity or
> > > natural human) to grant permission for ASF. If only for code during
> certain
> > > period, that means some code is not get permitted for Apache which is
> very
> > > weird. :(
> > >
> > > hulk <hu...@gmail.com>于2022年4月25日 周一上午11:52写道：
> > >
> > > > Thanks all,
> > > >
> > > > From the meitu side, they think should claim the date clearly
> instead of
> > > > implicitly,
> > > > so I'm not sure whether is ok to add this clarification on SGA or
> not?
> > > > If not, are there other agreements that should be signed for podling
> IP
> > > > Clearance?
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 11:13 AM Sheng Wu <wu.sheng.841108@gmail.com
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Please check the SGA template of ASF, like Craig mentioned,
> usually,
> > > > > there is no date/timestamp included.
> > > > > The foundation just needs legal approval that the company granted
> to
> > > > > move codes to the foundation, others(like individuals) should
> submit
> > > > > ICLA(s)
> > > > >
> > > > > Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > > > Twitter, wusheng1108
> > > > >
> > > > > hulk <hu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 10:19写道：
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the
> project
> > > > > > > moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner from a
> > > > > > > license perspective?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Kvrocks has transferred from the meitu to the KvrocksLabs
> > > organization
> > > > > and claimed the copyright belongs to the Kvrocks community.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Is there a place/way to track this event?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We didn't track this event in a public place. The lawyer thinks
> they
> > > > can
> > > > > only grant the copyright when all of the contributors are their
> > > employees
> > > > > (before 2020.3.23). After that, the copyright should belong to the
> > > > Kvrocks
> > > > > community.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 8:29 AM Sheng Wu <
> wu.sheng.841108@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I think IPMC don't prepare SGA, SGA(s) are from original owners.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on belong
> to the
> > > > > Kvrocks
> > > > > >> community.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the
> project
> > > > > >> moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner from a
> > > > > >> license perspective? Is there a place/way to track this event?
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > > > >> Twitter, wusheng1108
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> tison <wa...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 06:46写道：
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > Hi IPMCs,
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > Recently we voted and accepted Kvrocks to the Incubator[1].
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA, we meet an issue
> that
> > > > the
> > > > > >> > original entity sign a SGA but explicit limit the agreement on
> > > code
> > > > > from
> > > > > >> > 2018 to 2020.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on belong
> to the
> > > > > Kvrocks
> > > > > >> > community.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > The issue is that since the original entity sign such a SGA
> and
> > > all
> > > > > core
> > > > > >> > contributors sign ICLAs, is there other agreements should be
> > > signed
> > > > > for
> > > > > >> > podling IP Clearance?
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > Best,
> > > > > >> > tison.
> > > > > >> >
> > > > > >> > [1]
> > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/shxcg56j3x36t75x63voj82s6hhdtrcv
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: Multiple entities of software grant agreement
Posted by Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com>.
> but I think it's right that meitu should claim clearly about the copyright
date since the
Do you mean there is no single Meitu employee(s) was
working/contributed to that project ever since?
Because the org is virtual on GitHub, and meitu can't sign CCLA or SGA
to that virtual group back then, I think one way or another, Meitu
still need to prove the SGA from the transfer date to now.
It is better for meitu to sign the SGA to declare all
contributions(from beginning to now), others(individuals) would submit
their ICLA(or other companies' SGA) for some codes after the transfer.
Sheng Wu 吴晟
Twitter, wusheng1108
hulk <hu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 15:06写道：
>
> Thanks for junping reply.
>
> Yes, we also agree that should grant the whole source code repository for
> ASF,
> but I think it's right that meitu should claim clearly about the copyright
> date since the
> the repository was moved to another organization after then.
>
> So our question is should we need to sign extra other agreements for
> podling IP Clearance?
>
>
>
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 2:57 PM 俊平堵 <ju...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > I think SGA here should be the same as other project.
> > As Craig mentioned above, it is code’s copyright owner ( a legal entity or
> > natural human) to grant permission for ASF. If only for code during certain
> > period, that means some code is not get permitted for Apache which is very
> > weird. :(
> >
> > hulk <hu...@gmail.com>于2022年4月25日 周一上午11:52写道：
> >
> > > Thanks all,
> > >
> > > From the meitu side, they think should claim the date clearly instead of
> > > implicitly,
> > > so I'm not sure whether is ok to add this clarification on SGA or not?
> > > If not, are there other agreements that should be signed for podling IP
> > > Clearance?
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 11:13 AM Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Please check the SGA template of ASF, like Craig mentioned, usually,
> > > > there is no date/timestamp included.
> > > > The foundation just needs legal approval that the company granted to
> > > > move codes to the foundation, others(like individuals) should submit
> > > > ICLA(s)
> > > >
> > > > Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > > Twitter, wusheng1108
> > > >
> > > > hulk <hu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 10:19写道：
> > > > >
> > > > > > I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the project
> > > > > > moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner from a
> > > > > > license perspective?
> > > > >
> > > > > Kvrocks has transferred from the meitu to the KvrocksLabs
> > organization
> > > > and claimed the copyright belongs to the Kvrocks community.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Is there a place/way to track this event?
> > > > >
> > > > > We didn't track this event in a public place. The lawyer thinks they
> > > can
> > > > only grant the copyright when all of the contributors are their
> > employees
> > > > (before 2020.3.23). After that, the copyright should belong to the
> > > Kvrocks
> > > > community.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 8:29 AM Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I think IPMC don't prepare SGA, SGA(s) are from original owners.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on belong to the
> > > > Kvrocks
> > > > >> community.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the project
> > > > >> moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner from a
> > > > >> license perspective? Is there a place/way to track this event?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > > >> Twitter, wusheng1108
> > > > >>
> > > > >> tison <wa...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 06:46写道：
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Hi IPMCs,
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Recently we voted and accepted Kvrocks to the Incubator[1].
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA, we meet an issue that
> > > the
> > > > >> > original entity sign a SGA but explicit limit the agreement on
> > code
> > > > from
> > > > >> > 2018 to 2020.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on belong to the
> > > > Kvrocks
> > > > >> > community.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > The issue is that since the original entity sign such a SGA and
> > all
> > > > core
> > > > >> > contributors sign ICLAs, is there other agreements should be
> > signed
> > > > for
> > > > >> > podling IP Clearance?
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Best,
> > > > >> > tison.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > [1]
> > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/shxcg56j3x36t75x63voj82s6hhdtrcv
> > > >
> > >
> >
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Multiple entities of software grant agreement
Posted by hulk <hu...@gmail.com>.
Thanks for junping reply.
Yes, we also agree that should grant the whole source code repository for
ASF,
but I think it's right that meitu should claim clearly about the copyright
date since the
the repository was moved to another organization after then.
So our question is should we need to sign extra other agreements for
podling IP Clearance?
On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 2:57 PM 俊平堵 <ju...@apache.org> wrote:
> I think SGA here should be the same as other project.
> As Craig mentioned above, it is code’s copyright owner ( a legal entity or
> natural human) to grant permission for ASF. If only for code during certain
> period, that means some code is not get permitted for Apache which is very
> weird. :(
>
> hulk <hu...@gmail.com>于2022年4月25日 周一上午11:52写道：
>
> > Thanks all,
> >
> > From the meitu side, they think should claim the date clearly instead of
> > implicitly,
> > so I'm not sure whether is ok to add this clarification on SGA or not?
> > If not, are there other agreements that should be signed for podling IP
> > Clearance?
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 11:13 AM Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Please check the SGA template of ASF, like Craig mentioned, usually,
> > > there is no date/timestamp included.
> > > The foundation just needs legal approval that the company granted to
> > > move codes to the foundation, others(like individuals) should submit
> > > ICLA(s)
> > >
> > > Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > Twitter, wusheng1108
> > >
> > > hulk <hu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 10:19写道：
> > > >
> > > > > I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the project
> > > > > moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner from a
> > > > > license perspective?
> > > >
> > > > Kvrocks has transferred from the meitu to the KvrocksLabs
> organization
> > > and claimed the copyright belongs to the Kvrocks community.
> > > >
> > > > > Is there a place/way to track this event?
> > > >
> > > > We didn't track this event in a public place. The lawyer thinks they
> > can
> > > only grant the copyright when all of the contributors are their
> employees
> > > (before 2020.3.23). After that, the copyright should belong to the
> > Kvrocks
> > > community.
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 8:29 AM Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA
> > > >>
> > > >> I think IPMC don't prepare SGA, SGA(s) are from original owners.
> > > >>
> > > >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on belong to the
> > > Kvrocks
> > > >> community.
> > > >>
> > > >> I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the project
> > > >> moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner from a
> > > >> license perspective? Is there a place/way to track this event?
> > > >>
> > > >> Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > > >> Twitter, wusheng1108
> > > >>
> > > >> tison <wa...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 06:46写道：
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Hi IPMCs,
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Recently we voted and accepted Kvrocks to the Incubator[1].
> > > >> >
> > > >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA, we meet an issue that
> > the
> > > >> > original entity sign a SGA but explicit limit the agreement on
> code
> > > from
> > > >> > 2018 to 2020.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on belong to the
> > > Kvrocks
> > > >> > community.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > The issue is that since the original entity sign such a SGA and
> all
> > > core
> > > >> > contributors sign ICLAs, is there other agreements should be
> signed
> > > for
> > > >> > podling IP Clearance?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Best,
> > > >> > tison.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > [1]
> > https://lists.apache.org/thread/shxcg56j3x36t75x63voj82s6hhdtrcv
> > >
> >
>
Re: Multiple entities of software grant agreement
Posted by 俊平堵 <ju...@apache.org>.
I think SGA here should be the same as other project.
As Craig mentioned above, it is code’s copyright owner ( a legal entity or
natural human) to grant permission for ASF. If only for code during certain
period, that means some code is not get permitted for Apache which is very
weird. :(
hulk <hu...@gmail.com>于2022年4月25日 周一上午11:52写道：
> Thanks all,
>
> From the meitu side, they think should claim the date clearly instead of
> implicitly,
> so I'm not sure whether is ok to add this clarification on SGA or not?
> If not, are there other agreements that should be signed for podling IP
> Clearance?
>
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 11:13 AM Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > Please check the SGA template of ASF, like Craig mentioned, usually,
> > there is no date/timestamp included.
> > The foundation just needs legal approval that the company granted to
> > move codes to the foundation, others(like individuals) should submit
> > ICLA(s)
> >
> > Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > Twitter, wusheng1108
> >
> > hulk <hu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 10:19写道：
> > >
> > > > I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the project
> > > > moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner from a
> > > > license perspective?
> > >
> > > Kvrocks has transferred from the meitu to the KvrocksLabs organization
> > and claimed the copyright belongs to the Kvrocks community.
> > >
> > > > Is there a place/way to track this event?
> > >
> > > We didn't track this event in a public place. The lawyer thinks they
> can
> > only grant the copyright when all of the contributors are their employees
> > (before 2020.3.23). After that, the copyright should belong to the
> Kvrocks
> > community.
> > >
> > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 8:29 AM Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA
> > >>
> > >> I think IPMC don't prepare SGA, SGA(s) are from original owners.
> > >>
> > >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on belong to the
> > Kvrocks
> > >> community.
> > >>
> > >> I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the project
> > >> moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner from a
> > >> license perspective? Is there a place/way to track this event?
> > >>
> > >> Sheng Wu 吴晟
> > >> Twitter, wusheng1108
> > >>
> > >> tison <wa...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 06:46写道：
> > >> >
> > >> > Hi IPMCs,
> > >> >
> > >> > Recently we voted and accepted Kvrocks to the Incubator[1].
> > >> >
> > >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA, we meet an issue that
> the
> > >> > original entity sign a SGA but explicit limit the agreement on code
> > from
> > >> > 2018 to 2020.
> > >> >
> > >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on belong to the
> > Kvrocks
> > >> > community.
> > >> >
> > >> > The issue is that since the original entity sign such a SGA and all
> > core
> > >> > contributors sign ICLAs, is there other agreements should be signed
> > for
> > >> > podling IP Clearance?
> > >> >
> > >> > Best,
> > >> > tison.
> > >> >
> > >> > [1]
> https://lists.apache.org/thread/shxcg56j3x36t75x63voj82s6hhdtrcv
> >
>
Re: Multiple entities of software grant agreement
Posted by hulk <hu...@gmail.com>.
Thanks all,
From the meitu side, they think should claim the date clearly instead of
implicitly,
so I'm not sure whether is ok to add this clarification on SGA or not?
If not, are there other agreements that should be signed for podling IP
Clearance?
On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 11:13 AM Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Please check the SGA template of ASF, like Craig mentioned, usually,
> there is no date/timestamp included.
> The foundation just needs legal approval that the company granted to
> move codes to the foundation, others(like individuals) should submit
> ICLA(s)
>
> Sheng Wu 吴晟
> Twitter, wusheng1108
>
> hulk <hu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 10:19写道：
> >
> > > I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the project
> > > moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner from a
> > > license perspective?
> >
> > Kvrocks has transferred from the meitu to the KvrocksLabs organization
> and claimed the copyright belongs to the Kvrocks community.
> >
> > > Is there a place/way to track this event?
> >
> > We didn't track this event in a public place. The lawyer thinks they can
> only grant the copyright when all of the contributors are their employees
> (before 2020.3.23). After that, the copyright should belong to the Kvrocks
> community.
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 8:29 AM Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA
> >>
> >> I think IPMC don't prepare SGA, SGA(s) are from original owners.
> >>
> >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on belong to the
> Kvrocks
> >> community.
> >>
> >> I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the project
> >> moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner from a
> >> license perspective? Is there a place/way to track this event?
> >>
> >> Sheng Wu 吴晟
> >> Twitter, wusheng1108
> >>
> >> tison <wa...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 06:46写道：
> >> >
> >> > Hi IPMCs,
> >> >
> >> > Recently we voted and accepted Kvrocks to the Incubator[1].
> >> >
> >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA, we meet an issue that the
> >> > original entity sign a SGA but explicit limit the agreement on code
> from
> >> > 2018 to 2020.
> >> >
> >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on belong to the
> Kvrocks
> >> > community.
> >> >
> >> > The issue is that since the original entity sign such a SGA and all
> core
> >> > contributors sign ICLAs, is there other agreements should be signed
> for
> >> > podling IP Clearance?
> >> >
> >> > Best,
> >> > tison.
> >> >
> >> > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/shxcg56j3x36t75x63voj82s6hhdtrcv
>
Re: Multiple entities of software grant agreement
Posted by Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com>.
Please check the SGA template of ASF, like Craig mentioned, usually,
there is no date/timestamp included.
The foundation just needs legal approval that the company granted to
move codes to the foundation, others(like individuals) should submit
ICLA(s)
Sheng Wu 吴晟
Twitter, wusheng1108
hulk <hu...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 10:19写道：
>
> > I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the project
> > moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner from a
> > license perspective?
>
> Kvrocks has transferred from the meitu to the KvrocksLabs organization and claimed the copyright belongs to the Kvrocks community.
>
> > Is there a place/way to track this event?
>
> We didn't track this event in a public place. The lawyer thinks they can only grant the copyright when all of the contributors are their employees (before 2020.3.23). After that, the copyright should belong to the Kvrocks community.
>
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 8:29 AM Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA
>>
>> I think IPMC don't prepare SGA, SGA(s) are from original owners.
>>
>> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on belong to the Kvrocks
>> community.
>>
>> I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the project
>> moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner from a
>> license perspective? Is there a place/way to track this event?
>>
>> Sheng Wu 吴晟
>> Twitter, wusheng1108
>>
>> tison <wa...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 06:46写道：
>> >
>> > Hi IPMCs,
>> >
>> > Recently we voted and accepted Kvrocks to the Incubator[1].
>> >
>> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA, we meet an issue that the
>> > original entity sign a SGA but explicit limit the agreement on code from
>> > 2018 to 2020.
>> >
>> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on belong to the Kvrocks
>> > community.
>> >
>> > The issue is that since the original entity sign such a SGA and all core
>> > contributors sign ICLAs, is there other agreements should be signed for
>> > podling IP Clearance?
>> >
>> > Best,
>> > tison.
>> >
>> > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/shxcg56j3x36t75x63voj82s6hhdtrcv
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Multiple entities of software grant agreement
Posted by Craig Russell <ap...@gmail.com>.
Hi,
The grant covers the code that is owned by the grantor.
No date is needed.
Craig
> On Apr 24, 2022, at 7:18 PM, hulk <hu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the project
>> moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner from a
>> license perspective?
>
> Kvrocks has transferred from the meitu to the KvrocksLabs organization and
> claimed the copyright belongs to the Kvrocks community.
>
>> Is there a place/way to track this event?
>
> We didn't track this event in a public place. The lawyer thinks they can
> only grant the copyright when all of the contributors are their employees
> (before 2020.3.23). After that, the copyright should belong to the Kvrocks
> community.
>
> On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 8:29 AM Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA
>>
>> I think IPMC don't prepare SGA, SGA(s) are from original owners.
>>
>>> Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on belong to the
>> Kvrocks
>> community.
>>
>> I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the project
>> moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner from a
>> license perspective? Is there a place/way to track this event?
>>
>> Sheng Wu 吴晟
>> Twitter, wusheng1108
>>
>> tison <wa...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 06:46写道：
>>>
>>> Hi IPMCs,
>>>
>>> Recently we voted and accepted Kvrocks to the Incubator[1].
>>>
>>> While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA, we meet an issue that the
>>> original entity sign a SGA but explicit limit the agreement on code from
>>> 2018 to 2020.
>>>
>>> Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on belong to the
>> Kvrocks
>>> community.
>>>
>>> The issue is that since the original entity sign such a SGA and all core
>>> contributors sign ICLAs, is there other agreements should be signed for
>>> podling IP Clearance?
>>>
>>> Best,
>>> tison.
>>>
>>> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/shxcg56j3x36t75x63voj82s6hhdtrcv
>>
Craig L Russell
clr@apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Multiple entities of software grant agreement
Posted by hulk <hu...@gmail.com>.
> I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the project
> moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner from a
> license perspective?
Kvrocks has transferred from the meitu to the KvrocksLabs organization and
claimed the copyright belongs to the Kvrocks community.
> Is there a place/way to track this event?
We didn't track this event in a public place. The lawyer thinks they can
only grant the copyright when all of the contributors are their employees
(before 2020.3.23). After that, the copyright should belong to the Kvrocks
community.
On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 8:29 AM Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA
>
> I think IPMC don't prepare SGA, SGA(s) are from original owners.
>
> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on belong to the
> Kvrocks
> community.
>
> I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the project
> moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner from a
> license perspective? Is there a place/way to track this event?
>
> Sheng Wu 吴晟
> Twitter, wusheng1108
>
> tison <wa...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 06:46写道：
> >
> > Hi IPMCs,
> >
> > Recently we voted and accepted Kvrocks to the Incubator[1].
> >
> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA, we meet an issue that the
> > original entity sign a SGA but explicit limit the agreement on code from
> > 2018 to 2020.
> >
> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on belong to the
> Kvrocks
> > community.
> >
> > The issue is that since the original entity sign such a SGA and all core
> > contributors sign ICLAs, is there other agreements should be signed for
> > podling IP Clearance?
> >
> > Best,
> > tison.
> >
> > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/shxcg56j3x36t75x63voj82s6hhdtrcv
>
Re: Multiple entities of software grant agreement
Posted by Sheng Wu <wu...@gmail.com>.
> While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA
I think IPMC don't prepare SGA, SGA(s) are from original owners.
> Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on belong to the Kvrocks
community.
I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the project
moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner from a
license perspective? Is there a place/way to track this event?
Sheng Wu 吴晟
Twitter, wusheng1108
tison <wa...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 06:46写道：
>
> Hi IPMCs,
>
> Recently we voted and accepted Kvrocks to the Incubator[1].
>
> While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA, we meet an issue that the
> original entity sign a SGA but explicit limit the agreement on code from
> 2018 to 2020.
>
> Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on belong to the Kvrocks
> community.
>
> The issue is that since the original entity sign such a SGA and all core
> contributors sign ICLAs, is there other agreements should be signed for
> podling IP Clearance?
>
> Best,
> tison.
>
> [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread/shxcg56j3x36t75x63voj82s6hhdtrcv
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org