commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Bill Rossi <>
Subject Re: [math] elementary functions.
Date Tue, 08 Jun 2010 23:49:00 GMT


Thanks for your help.   I've created a JIRA with the archive attached as 
you suggest.

I understand it will take some time to review this, and I'm willing to 
make changes if necessary.

I will get a SGA and a ICLA over to the Foundation.


On Wed, 9 Jun 2010, Luc Maisonobe wrote:

> Le 08/06/2010 23:07, Bill Rossi a écrit :
>> Luc,
>> I'm OK with providing an ICLA or SGA or both.  A bit of history on the
>> project to help you decide what is appropriate:
>> While working for my employer some last year we noticed some of these
>> functions were slow.  I quickly wrote a couple of faster replacements.
>> Seperately I decided to take the idea and see how far I could push it.
>> On my own time I developed an new implementaion that had all the
>> characteristics I described earlier.
>> Although it seemed unlikely that my employer would try claim ownership
>> of software that I didn't write for them, I have asked for and  obtained
>> a written declaration from them saying they have no claim on it.
> Then I would ask you if you could provide a Software Grant Agreement,
> signed by yourself.
>> It was an interesting project and I'm just tring to solve this problem
>> so others won't have to deal with it again.   I'm happy to help maintain
>> it, but I do have a limited amount of time available for that.
> We all have limited time, so we would be happy with someone like you
> helping us.
>> As for the size of the project, the software itself is 2690 lines.  The
>> test cases and tools used to create the software add an additional 2430
>> lines.  The project was started in Oct 2009, so not quite a year yet.
> Whoa. It is a huge project! We definitely need a SGA for such a beast.
> So the next step would be as James advised: open a JIRA issue explaining
> your proposal and including a link to this thread
> (<>) and attach an archive
> with the code on it so we can review it. You should also send both an
> SGA and an ICLA to the foundation (these are legal papers, so a physical
> copy -fax or paper mail- is needed rather than an e-mail).
> We will discuss on this list about your proposal to decide if we can
> include it or not, with or without changes.
> Please keep in mind that we too have limited time, so we may take some
> time to review and discuss this. As an example, I already have to review
> a proposal made by another committer (Gilles), and failed to do it up to
> now (I'm sorry for that and will try to do it soon).
> Luc
>> I also previously tried to interest the people at the jQuantLib project
>> (, but they don't seem very interested.
>> Bill
>> On Tue, 8 Jun 2010, Luc Maisonobe wrote:
>>> Le 08/06/2010 21:16, James Carman a écrit :
>>>> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Luc Maisonobe <>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> I would say it depends both on the size of the contribution and the
>>>>> fact
>>>>> it is completely new or a patch on existing code. The examples I
>>>>> know of
>>>>> are the mantissa library I contributed in 2006, the simplex solver Ben
>>>>> contributed last year and the microsphere interpolation Gilles
>>>>> contributed last year too. In these 3 cases, the size was of the order
>>>>> of magnitude of 100s or 1000s of lines and it was for new features. We
>>>>> asked for a software grant in all cases.
>>>> We asked for the grant because it was required or just as a precaution?
>>> It was required for at least the two first cases. Concerning Mantissa,
>>> it was an existing product I wrote and published under the terms of the
>>> modified BSD license, so it was a large set of code and there was a
>>> license change. Concerning the simplex solver, it was developed by Ben
>>> inside Google so we needed some signed form by a Google exec. I asked on
>>> the legal list for this case and they considered the software grant was
>>> really needed.
>>> Considering microsphere, I checked further: we didn't ask for a software
>>> Grant but rather for an ICLA from Gilles, because he developed it
>>> explicitely for inclusion in commons-math.
>>> I think formally a Software Grant would be needed for all things
>>> imported from outside without having been developed explicitely for the
>>> foundation. The page on the foundation site reads:
>>>  When an individual or corporation decides to donate a body of
>>>  existing software or documentation to one of the Apache projects,
>>>  they need to execute a formal Software Grant Agreement (SGA) with the
>>>  ASF. Typically, this is done after negotiating approval with the ASF
>>>  Incubator or one of the PMCs, since the ASF will not accept software
>>>  unless there is a viable community available to support a
>>>  collaborative project.
>>> As I understand Bill's first message about FastMath, he developed it
>>> over one year and wants to contribute it afterwards, so we need a
>>> Software Grant. Of course it would be even better if at the same time he
>>> would provide an ICLA to be able to maintain it as part of Apache
>>> commons-math.
>>> Luc
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>> For additional commands, e-mail:
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>> For additional commands, e-mail:
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
> For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message