You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to general@incubator.apache.org by Craig Russell <ap...@gmail.com> on 2019/05/14 00:20:03 UTC
Podling status Copyright section
The Copyright section of the podling status page says "Check and make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF been received. It is only necessary to transfer rights for the package, the core code, and any new code produced by the project.".
I'd propose a change:
"Check to make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF been received (SGA or CCLA). It is necessary to transfer rights for any existing package and core code. Any new code produced by the project must be covered by ICLA."
This change is proposed because it might not be obvious to everyone what "the papers that transfer rights" are. And new code produced must be committed by a person who has filed an ICLA.
Patches welcome.
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: Podling status Copyright section
Posted by Furkan KAMACI <fu...@gmail.com>.
+1
On Tue, May 14, 2019 at 7:19 PM Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org> wrote:
> +1
>
> *From: *Justin Mclean <ju...@me.com>
> *Date: *Tue, May 14, 2019 at 1:38 AM
> *To: * <ge...@incubator.apache.org>
>
> Hi,
> >
> > +1 from me much clearer
> >
> > Justin
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >
> >
>
Re: Podling status Copyright section
Posted by Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org>.
+1
*From: *Justin Mclean <ju...@me.com>
*Date: *Tue, May 14, 2019 at 1:38 AM
*To: * <ge...@incubator.apache.org>
Hi,
>
> +1 from me much clearer
>
> Justin
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>
Re: Podling status Copyright section
Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@me.com>.
Hi,
+1 from me much clearer
Justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Podling status Copyright section
Posted by Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>.
+1 on change, much clearer. Perhaps a link to the docs or a page with those
links?
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 19:28, Craig Russell <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The Copyright section of the podling status page says "Check and make sure
> that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF been received. It is only
> necessary to transfer rights for the package, the core code, and any new
> code produced by the project.".
>
> I'd propose a change:
>
> "Check to make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF been
> received (SGA or CCLA). It is necessary to transfer rights for any existing
> package and core code. Any new code produced by the project must be covered
> by ICLA."
>
> This change is proposed because it might not be obvious to everyone what
> "the papers that transfer rights" are. And new code produced must be
> committed by a person who has filed an ICLA.
>
> Patches welcome.
>
> 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
>
> --
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
Re: Podling status Copyright section
Posted by Justin Mclean <ju...@classsoftware.com>.
Hi,
> "Check to make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF been received (SGA or CCLA). It is necessary to transfer rights for any existing package and core code. Any new code produced by the project must be covered by ICLA."
While clearer, I just want to check it covers all cases? I know in some cases both a SGA and CCLA was needed, I assume the company thought it needed one when we don’t actually care? I can see we’re covered by ICLAs in the case where we have SGA+ICLAs and CCLA+ICLA.
What would happen in the case where we had CCLA+ICLAs and the company then turned around and said everything pass the CCLA is ours as our employee contracts state so? Hypothetical and unlikely to happen I know but I’m curious to know. I think if this happen doesn't matter given the code base is under ALv2 and basically free for all to use. I would reason that the copyright owners just are not who we thought they are ie. the company owns it not the individual contributors, but there’s no real effect from that change of ownership so we don’t care?
Thanks,
Justin
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Podling Status Event Dates - Re: Podling status Copyright section
Posted by Kenneth Knowles <ke...@apache.org>.
Thanks for this. The steps are very clear and I like the addition of
repository clearance.
Kenn
On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 12:52 PM Chris Lambertus <cm...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
> > On May 15, 2019, at 12:10 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >
> > Hi -
> >
> > I think that we are mixing together a few events in a podling's
> lifecycle. Since I published a plan to update the status process and am
> just about to implement I think we should discuss events in a modern way
> since much of the language is a decade or more old and we are each trying
> to find the best language for modern times which includes our collective
> thoughts and understanding.
> >
> > (1) Start Date - Podling Proposal is Accepted.
> > (2) Podlings.xml file updated.
> > (3) Status page created.
> > (Not needed in improvement plan where the correct dates and events will
> be maintained through Whimsy Roster/Status pages)
> > (4) LDAP and Mailing lists created by Infra.
>
>
> DNS is a required Infra step. the LDAP creation is via Whimsy, and anyone
> with appropriate karma can click the button, although I do not currently
> know who has the karma. It is nominally apldap (Infra) but I think
> Secretary may also be able to take this step? This can be changed to suit,
> and could easily happen as part of the onboarding process (maybe by
> Secretary, maybe by some other designee) after podlings.xml has been
> updated. For now, it's easy enough to include it as an Infra step.
>
> Mailing lists are self-serve once the LDAP and DNS exists via
> https://selfserve.apache.org/ <https://selfserve.apache.org/>
>
>
>
> > (5) PPMC Member onboarding - ICLA, Apache accounts, ML signup.
> > (6) Codebase onboarding - assuming that all podling’s continue to fit
> the GitHub development model.
> > - SGA (or proof that CCLA/ICLA in some combination are appropriate.)
> > - List of Repositories Cleared - This is NEW and providing this will be
> very helpful to both the podling and INFRA.
> > - Different repositories may come under different SGAs (or ICLA/CCLA)
> > - Date the repository is moved (or copied) and accepted by the PPMC.
>
> Specifically for Infra onboarding, we really just need to know that "the
> Foundation" has accepted the code and the donation has been reviewed by
> someone in-the-know about these things. Historically, this has been
> Secretary. The most critical thing for infra is that the repositories
> requested to be moved to the ASF are the ones which Secretary has received
> the SGA for, and the person requesting the import include a mailing list
> link to the Secretary's acceptance of the SGA.
>
> Thanks for putting this together.
>
> -Chris
>
>
>
>
>
> > (7) Date that the donated code has been changed.
> > - AL2 headers
> > - Copyrights removed.
> > (8) First fully compliant release
> > - Date when the IPMC agrees that podling is making compliant releases.
> > (9) News - releases, added committers, added PPMC members, (added
> repositories?)
> >
> > Notes on (6):
> > (a) Providing clearance for each repository will provide INFRA with a
> clear place to confirm that GitHub JIRA requests are valid.
> > (b) Provide a clear view to the status of repositories.
> >
> > Does this breakdown help us focus on the code versus committer
> requirements?
> >
> >> On May 15, 2019, at 1:28 AM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, 15 May 2019 at 06:55, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.invalid>
> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I do not like the words "transfer rights". It could be interpreted as
> transfer of copyright. Copyright of existing code is not transferred to
> the ASF, AIUI. How about "Check to make sure that an SGA or CCLA has been
> received.”
> >
> > At the point the SGA is granted and the code repository moved over one
> of the first actions to add the AL2 headers where appropriate. The donation
> may be relicensed from proprietary to AL2. At this time the copyright line
> is typically removed.
> >
> > It is up to the donating companies what they do with their copyright to
> their copy.
> >
> >>>
> >>> I don't like hypotheticals, but I can imagine some individual starting
> a project on GitHub, has only a few files already under ALv2, and gets a
> project going at the ASF? Wouldn't we accept those few files under his
> ICLA and not require an SGA or CCLA?
> >
> > Yes. See 6 above.
> >
> >>>
> >>> I'd suggest dropping the second sentence ("it is necessary to transfer
> rights..."). AIUI, it is only necessary to grant a perpetual license to
> the ASF.
> >>
> >> Also, the CCLA is not required, and is not an alternative to the SGA
> >> -- as may perhaps be inferred by some from the phrase "(SGA or CCLA)"
> >>
> >> https://www.apache.org/licenses/cla-faq.html#cclas-not-required <
> https://www.apache.org/licenses/cla-faq.html#cclas-not-required>
> >
> > It is between the individuals and their employers if they can
> contribute. In the rare case where a company might not grant the donation
> via our SGA, but would with an CCLA, then we should be flexible. The
> question is where that decision should be made and how it is memorialized.
> >
> >>
> >>> I like your third sentence.
> >>>
> >>> HTH,
> >>> -Alex
> >>>
> >>> On 5/13/19, 5:28 PM, "Craig Russell" <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> The Copyright section of the podling status page says "Check and
> make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF been received. It
> is only necessary to transfer rights for the package, the core code, and
> any new code produced by the project.".
> >>>
> >>> I'd propose a change:
> >>>
> >>> "Check to make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF
> been received (SGA or CCLA). It is necessary to transfer rights for any
> existing package and core code. Any new code produced by the project must
> be covered by ICLA."
> >>>
> >>> This change is proposed because it might not be obvious to everyone
> what "the papers that transfer rights" are. And new code produced must be
> committed by a person who has filed an ICLA.
> >
> > I think that we set this language in the documentation. The status page
> is both documentation and status.
> >
> > Shall we iterate on the above list and patch the cookbook on the site?
> >
> > Regards,
> > Dave
> >>>
> >>> Patches welcome.
> >>>
> >>> 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
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> 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: Podling Status Event Dates - Re: Podling status Copyright section
Posted by Chris Lambertus <cm...@apache.org>.
> On May 15, 2019, at 12:10 PM, Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> Hi -
>
> I think that we are mixing together a few events in a podling's lifecycle. Since I published a plan to update the status process and am just about to implement I think we should discuss events in a modern way since much of the language is a decade or more old and we are each trying to find the best language for modern times which includes our collective thoughts and understanding.
>
> (1) Start Date - Podling Proposal is Accepted.
> (2) Podlings.xml file updated.
> (3) Status page created.
> (Not needed in improvement plan where the correct dates and events will be maintained through Whimsy Roster/Status pages)
> (4) LDAP and Mailing lists created by Infra.
DNS is a required Infra step. the LDAP creation is via Whimsy, and anyone with appropriate karma can click the button, although I do not currently know who has the karma. It is nominally apldap (Infra) but I think Secretary may also be able to take this step? This can be changed to suit, and could easily happen as part of the onboarding process (maybe by Secretary, maybe by some other designee) after podlings.xml has been updated. For now, it's easy enough to include it as an Infra step.
Mailing lists are self-serve once the LDAP and DNS exists via https://selfserve.apache.org/ <https://selfserve.apache.org/>
> (5) PPMC Member onboarding - ICLA, Apache accounts, ML signup.
> (6) Codebase onboarding - assuming that all podling’s continue to fit the GitHub development model.
> - SGA (or proof that CCLA/ICLA in some combination are appropriate.)
> - List of Repositories Cleared - This is NEW and providing this will be very helpful to both the podling and INFRA.
> - Different repositories may come under different SGAs (or ICLA/CCLA)
> - Date the repository is moved (or copied) and accepted by the PPMC.
Specifically for Infra onboarding, we really just need to know that "the Foundation" has accepted the code and the donation has been reviewed by someone in-the-know about these things. Historically, this has been Secretary. The most critical thing for infra is that the repositories requested to be moved to the ASF are the ones which Secretary has received the SGA for, and the person requesting the import include a mailing list link to the Secretary's acceptance of the SGA.
Thanks for putting this together.
-Chris
> (7) Date that the donated code has been changed.
> - AL2 headers
> - Copyrights removed.
> (8) First fully compliant release
> - Date when the IPMC agrees that podling is making compliant releases.
> (9) News - releases, added committers, added PPMC members, (added repositories?)
>
> Notes on (6):
> (a) Providing clearance for each repository will provide INFRA with a clear place to confirm that GitHub JIRA requests are valid.
> (b) Provide a clear view to the status of repositories.
>
> Does this breakdown help us focus on the code versus committer requirements?
>
>> On May 15, 2019, at 1:28 AM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, 15 May 2019 at 06:55, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.invalid> wrote:
>>>
>>> I do not like the words "transfer rights". It could be interpreted as transfer of copyright. Copyright of existing code is not transferred to the ASF, AIUI. How about "Check to make sure that an SGA or CCLA has been received.”
>
> At the point the SGA is granted and the code repository moved over one of the first actions to add the AL2 headers where appropriate. The donation may be relicensed from proprietary to AL2. At this time the copyright line is typically removed.
>
> It is up to the donating companies what they do with their copyright to their copy.
>
>>>
>>> I don't like hypotheticals, but I can imagine some individual starting a project on GitHub, has only a few files already under ALv2, and gets a project going at the ASF? Wouldn't we accept those few files under his ICLA and not require an SGA or CCLA?
>
> Yes. See 6 above.
>
>>>
>>> I'd suggest dropping the second sentence ("it is necessary to transfer rights..."). AIUI, it is only necessary to grant a perpetual license to the ASF.
>>
>> Also, the CCLA is not required, and is not an alternative to the SGA
>> -- as may perhaps be inferred by some from the phrase "(SGA or CCLA)"
>>
>> https://www.apache.org/licenses/cla-faq.html#cclas-not-required <https://www.apache.org/licenses/cla-faq.html#cclas-not-required>
>
> It is between the individuals and their employers if they can contribute. In the rare case where a company might not grant the donation via our SGA, but would with an CCLA, then we should be flexible. The question is where that decision should be made and how it is memorialized.
>
>>
>>> I like your third sentence.
>>>
>>> HTH,
>>> -Alex
>>>
>>> On 5/13/19, 5:28 PM, "Craig Russell" <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> The Copyright section of the podling status page says "Check and make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF been received. It is only necessary to transfer rights for the package, the core code, and any new code produced by the project.".
>>>
>>> I'd propose a change:
>>>
>>> "Check to make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF been received (SGA or CCLA). It is necessary to transfer rights for any existing package and core code. Any new code produced by the project must be covered by ICLA."
>>>
>>> This change is proposed because it might not be obvious to everyone what "the papers that transfer rights" are. And new code produced must be committed by a person who has filed an ICLA.
>
> I think that we set this language in the documentation. The status page is both documentation and status.
>
> Shall we iterate on the above list and patch the cookbook on the site?
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>>>
>>> Patches welcome.
>>>
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> 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
>>
>
Podling Status Event Dates - Re: Podling status Copyright section
Posted by Dave Fisher <da...@comcast.net>.
Hi -
I think that we are mixing together a few events in a podling's lifecycle. Since I published a plan to update the status process and am just about to implement I think we should discuss events in a modern way since much of the language is a decade or more old and we are each trying to find the best language for modern times which includes our collective thoughts and understanding.
(1) Start Date - Podling Proposal is Accepted.
(2) Podlings.xml file updated.
(3) Status page created.
(Not needed in improvement plan where the correct dates and events will be maintained through Whimsy Roster/Status pages)
(4) LDAP and Mailing lists created by Infra.
(5) PPMC Member onboarding - ICLA, Apache accounts, ML signup.
(6) Codebase onboarding - assuming that all podling’s continue to fit the GitHub development model.
- SGA (or proof that CCLA/ICLA in some combination are appropriate.)
- List of Repositories Cleared - This is NEW and providing this will be very helpful to both the podling and INFRA.
- Different repositories may come under different SGAs (or ICLA/CCLA)
- Date the repository is moved (or copied) and accepted by the PPMC.
(7) Date that the donated code has been changed.
- AL2 headers
- Copyrights removed.
(8) First fully compliant release
- Date when the IPMC agrees that podling is making compliant releases.
(9) News - releases, added committers, added PPMC members, (added repositories?)
Notes on (6):
(a) Providing clearance for each repository will provide INFRA with a clear place to confirm that GitHub JIRA requests are valid.
(b) Provide a clear view to the status of repositories.
Does this breakdown help us focus on the code versus committer requirements?
> On May 15, 2019, at 1:28 AM, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 15 May 2019 at 06:55, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> I do not like the words "transfer rights". It could be interpreted as transfer of copyright. Copyright of existing code is not transferred to the ASF, AIUI. How about "Check to make sure that an SGA or CCLA has been received.”
At the point the SGA is granted and the code repository moved over one of the first actions to add the AL2 headers where appropriate. The donation may be relicensed from proprietary to AL2. At this time the copyright line is typically removed.
It is up to the donating companies what they do with their copyright to their copy.
>>
>> I don't like hypotheticals, but I can imagine some individual starting a project on GitHub, has only a few files already under ALv2, and gets a project going at the ASF? Wouldn't we accept those few files under his ICLA and not require an SGA or CCLA?
Yes. See 6 above.
>>
>> I'd suggest dropping the second sentence ("it is necessary to transfer rights..."). AIUI, it is only necessary to grant a perpetual license to the ASF.
>
> Also, the CCLA is not required, and is not an alternative to the SGA
> -- as may perhaps be inferred by some from the phrase "(SGA or CCLA)"
>
> https://www.apache.org/licenses/cla-faq.html#cclas-not-required <https://www.apache.org/licenses/cla-faq.html#cclas-not-required>
It is between the individuals and their employers if they can contribute. In the rare case where a company might not grant the donation via our SGA, but would with an CCLA, then we should be flexible. The question is where that decision should be made and how it is memorialized.
>
>> I like your third sentence.
>>
>> HTH,
>> -Alex
>>
>> On 5/13/19, 5:28 PM, "Craig Russell" <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> The Copyright section of the podling status page says "Check and make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF been received. It is only necessary to transfer rights for the package, the core code, and any new code produced by the project.".
>>
>> I'd propose a change:
>>
>> "Check to make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF been received (SGA or CCLA). It is necessary to transfer rights for any existing package and core code. Any new code produced by the project must be covered by ICLA."
>>
>> This change is proposed because it might not be obvious to everyone what "the papers that transfer rights" are. And new code produced must be committed by a person who has filed an ICLA.
I think that we set this language in the documentation. The status page is both documentation and status.
Shall we iterate on the above list and patch the cookbook on the site?
Regards,
Dave
>>
>> Patches welcome.
>>
>> 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> 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: Podling status Copyright section
Posted by Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>.
A CCLA has two schedules (exhibits? sections?): one for employees, and one
for software grants. The grants section is typically left empty.
On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 11:15, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.invalid> wrote:
> Hi Matt,
>
> I'm not sure what "add" means, but there have been several past
> discussions where it appears that new code was brought in under a CCLA
> without an SGA.
>
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/d77183d7efd5faf331534edf7ee2de993e908cffa4feb7454f9a6ab1@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-236
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/2814bd99f77325f80c6bfbf1156debd22bf556bfd4b9786996c9217c@1423476452@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
> http://s.apache.org/YPe
>
> It is also my understanding (from Roy) that in some cases existing code
> can come in under an ICLA.
>
> HTH,
> -Alex
>
> On 5/15/19, 4:27 PM, "Matt Sicker" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> You can add a software grant to a CCLA concurrently, but not vice
> versa.
>
> On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 03:28, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Wed, 15 May 2019 at 06:55, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.invalid>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > I do not like the words "transfer rights". It could be
> interpreted as
> > transfer of copyright. Copyright of existing code is not
> transferred to
> > the ASF, AIUI. How about "Check to make sure that an SGA or CCLA
> has been
> > received."
> > >
> > > I don't like hypotheticals, but I can imagine some individual
> starting a
> > project on GitHub, has only a few files already under ALv2, and gets
> a
> > project going at the ASF? Wouldn't we accept those few files under
> his
> > ICLA and not require an SGA or CCLA?
> > >
> > > I'd suggest dropping the second sentence ("it is necessary to
> transfer
> > rights..."). AIUI, it is only necessary to grant a perpetual
> license to
> > the ASF.
> >
> > Also, the CCLA is not required, and is not an alternative to the SGA
> > -- as may perhaps be inferred by some from the phrase "(SGA or CCLA)"
> >
> >
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.apache.org%2Flicenses%2Fcla-faq.html%23cclas-not-required&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C7b354edcc5b244d70e7c08d6d98ced18%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636935596691256488&sdata=xS2K8uFmOV367uU65bfbmB6XR5IGsdY8OirvNAiyNO4%3D&reserved=0
> >
> > > I like your third sentence.
> > >
> > > HTH,
> > > -Alex
> > >
> > > On 5/13/19, 5:28 PM, "Craig Russell" <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > The Copyright section of the podling status page says "Check
> and
> > make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF been
> received. It
> > is only necessary to transfer rights for the package, the core code,
> and
> > any new code produced by the project.".
> > >
> > > I'd propose a change:
> > >
> > > "Check to make sure that the papers that transfer rights to
> the ASF
> > been received (SGA or CCLA). It is necessary to transfer rights for
> any
> > existing package and core code. Any new code produced by the project
> must
> > be covered by ICLA."
> > >
> > > This change is proposed because it might not be obvious to
> everyone
> > what "the papers that transfer rights" are. And new code produced
> must be
> > committed by a person who has filed an ICLA.
> > >
> > > Patches welcome.
> > >
> > > 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
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > 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
> >
> > --
> Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
--
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
Re: Podling status Copyright section
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>.
Hi Matt,
I'm not sure what "add" means, but there have been several past discussions where it appears that new code was brought in under a CCLA without an SGA.
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/d77183d7efd5faf331534edf7ee2de993e908cffa4feb7454f9a6ab1@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-236
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/2814bd99f77325f80c6bfbf1156debd22bf556bfd4b9786996c9217c@1423476452@%3Cgeneral.incubator.apache.org%3E
http://s.apache.org/YPe
It is also my understanding (from Roy) that in some cases existing code can come in under an ICLA.
HTH,
-Alex
On 5/15/19, 4:27 PM, "Matt Sicker" <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
You can add a software grant to a CCLA concurrently, but not vice versa.
On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 03:28, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 15 May 2019 at 06:55, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > I do not like the words "transfer rights". It could be interpreted as
> transfer of copyright. Copyright of existing code is not transferred to
> the ASF, AIUI. How about "Check to make sure that an SGA or CCLA has been
> received."
> >
> > I don't like hypotheticals, but I can imagine some individual starting a
> project on GitHub, has only a few files already under ALv2, and gets a
> project going at the ASF? Wouldn't we accept those few files under his
> ICLA and not require an SGA or CCLA?
> >
> > I'd suggest dropping the second sentence ("it is necessary to transfer
> rights..."). AIUI, it is only necessary to grant a perpetual license to
> the ASF.
>
> Also, the CCLA is not required, and is not an alternative to the SGA
> -- as may perhaps be inferred by some from the phrase "(SGA or CCLA)"
>
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.apache.org%2Flicenses%2Fcla-faq.html%23cclas-not-required&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C7b354edcc5b244d70e7c08d6d98ced18%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C636935596691256488&sdata=xS2K8uFmOV367uU65bfbmB6XR5IGsdY8OirvNAiyNO4%3D&reserved=0
>
> > I like your third sentence.
> >
> > HTH,
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 5/13/19, 5:28 PM, "Craig Russell" <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > The Copyright section of the podling status page says "Check and
> make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF been received. It
> is only necessary to transfer rights for the package, the core code, and
> any new code produced by the project.".
> >
> > I'd propose a change:
> >
> > "Check to make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF
> been received (SGA or CCLA). It is necessary to transfer rights for any
> existing package and core code. Any new code produced by the project must
> be covered by ICLA."
> >
> > This change is proposed because it might not be obvious to everyone
> what "the papers that transfer rights" are. And new code produced must be
> committed by a person who has filed an ICLA.
> >
> > Patches welcome.
> >
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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
>
> --
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
Re: Podling status Copyright section
Posted by Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>.
You can add a software grant to a CCLA concurrently, but not vice versa.
On Wed, May 15, 2019 at 03:28, sebb <se...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 15 May 2019 at 06:55, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > I do not like the words "transfer rights". It could be interpreted as
> transfer of copyright. Copyright of existing code is not transferred to
> the ASF, AIUI. How about "Check to make sure that an SGA or CCLA has been
> received."
> >
> > I don't like hypotheticals, but I can imagine some individual starting a
> project on GitHub, has only a few files already under ALv2, and gets a
> project going at the ASF? Wouldn't we accept those few files under his
> ICLA and not require an SGA or CCLA?
> >
> > I'd suggest dropping the second sentence ("it is necessary to transfer
> rights..."). AIUI, it is only necessary to grant a perpetual license to
> the ASF.
>
> Also, the CCLA is not required, and is not an alternative to the SGA
> -- as may perhaps be inferred by some from the phrase "(SGA or CCLA)"
>
> https://www.apache.org/licenses/cla-faq.html#cclas-not-required
>
> > I like your third sentence.
> >
> > HTH,
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 5/13/19, 5:28 PM, "Craig Russell" <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > The Copyright section of the podling status page says "Check and
> make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF been received. It
> is only necessary to transfer rights for the package, the core code, and
> any new code produced by the project.".
> >
> > I'd propose a change:
> >
> > "Check to make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF
> been received (SGA or CCLA). It is necessary to transfer rights for any
> existing package and core code. Any new code produced by the project must
> be covered by ICLA."
> >
> > This change is proposed because it might not be obvious to everyone
> what "the papers that transfer rights" are. And new code produced must be
> committed by a person who has filed an ICLA.
> >
> > Patches welcome.
> >
> > 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
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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
>
> --
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
Re: Podling status Copyright section
Posted by sebb <se...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, 15 May 2019 at 06:55, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> I do not like the words "transfer rights". It could be interpreted as transfer of copyright. Copyright of existing code is not transferred to the ASF, AIUI. How about "Check to make sure that an SGA or CCLA has been received."
>
> I don't like hypotheticals, but I can imagine some individual starting a project on GitHub, has only a few files already under ALv2, and gets a project going at the ASF? Wouldn't we accept those few files under his ICLA and not require an SGA or CCLA?
>
> I'd suggest dropping the second sentence ("it is necessary to transfer rights..."). AIUI, it is only necessary to grant a perpetual license to the ASF.
Also, the CCLA is not required, and is not an alternative to the SGA
-- as may perhaps be inferred by some from the phrase "(SGA or CCLA)"
https://www.apache.org/licenses/cla-faq.html#cclas-not-required
> I like your third sentence.
>
> HTH,
> -Alex
>
> On 5/13/19, 5:28 PM, "Craig Russell" <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> The Copyright section of the podling status page says "Check and make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF been received. It is only necessary to transfer rights for the package, the core code, and any new code produced by the project.".
>
> I'd propose a change:
>
> "Check to make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF been received (SGA or CCLA). It is necessary to transfer rights for any existing package and core code. Any new code produced by the project must be covered by ICLA."
>
> This change is proposed because it might not be obvious to everyone what "the papers that transfer rights" are. And new code produced must be committed by a person who has filed an ICLA.
>
> Patches welcome.
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> 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: Podling status Copyright section
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>.
I do not like the words "transfer rights". It could be interpreted as transfer of copyright. Copyright of existing code is not transferred to the ASF, AIUI. How about "Check to make sure that an SGA or CCLA has been received."
I don't like hypotheticals, but I can imagine some individual starting a project on GitHub, has only a few files already under ALv2, and gets a project going at the ASF? Wouldn't we accept those few files under his ICLA and not require an SGA or CCLA?
I'd suggest dropping the second sentence ("it is necessary to transfer rights..."). AIUI, it is only necessary to grant a perpetual license to the ASF.
I like your third sentence.
HTH,
-Alex
On 5/13/19, 5:28 PM, "Craig Russell" <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
The Copyright section of the podling status page says "Check and make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF been received. It is only necessary to transfer rights for the package, the core code, and any new code produced by the project.".
I'd propose a change:
"Check to make sure that the papers that transfer rights to the ASF been received (SGA or CCLA). It is necessary to transfer rights for any existing package and core code. Any new code produced by the project must be covered by ICLA."
This change is proposed because it might not be obvious to everyone what "the papers that transfer rights" are. And new code produced must be committed by a person who has filed an ICLA.
Patches welcome.
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
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org