incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Request for Comment : Harmony Contribution Policy
Date Mon, 01 Aug 2005 17:35:58 GMT

On Aug 1, 2005, at 1:22 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote:

> --On August 1, 2005 12:06:27 AM -0400 "Geir Magnusson Jr."  
> <geirm@apache.org> wrote:
>
>
>> Comments?  (Like I need to ask for them... )
>>
>
> I think Part II should be removed or rather be the opposite: which  
> components are you forbidden to participate in due to the answers  
> in the questionnaire.  I don't like seeing the community get pigeon- 
> holed like that: commit access should be 'blanket' unless there's a  
> legal reason not to do so.

That is what Part II is - you can do anything except for the specific  
pieces for which you declare.

I see why you were confused by it, so we'll clean up that language.

>
> Part IV should contain mention of the software grant to the ASF.   
> We should have these on file for all large donations not developed  
> under the 'confines' of the ASF.

Ah, yes. I thought I stated that clearly that standard ASF policy is  
the base for this all - SG or CCLA+SG is required.  Will fix to be  
clear.

>
> Part VIII should probably mention "employed by a corporation".  
> (Self-employed people wouldn't necessarily need to sign a CCLA.)

Sure.  Good point.

>
> Furthermore, my understanding of copyright law is that you can't be  
> tainted by 'reading' source code years ago and then writing a  
> version independently.

I think it depends on the source.  If there's a trade secret that you  
learned in the process, you probably still have a problem, right?

>   (In fact, the examples I've heard of are 'minutes apart' is  
> legally acceptable.)  Of course, patent infringement occurs whether  
> you've read the code or not.  FWIW, our compiler languages class  
> here at UC Irvine teaches Java internals - therefore, they'd all be  
> 'tainted' under this definition - which isn't actually the case.

Ok - this is a good example to help is iteratively clarify.  How are  
they tainted?

>
> The relevant questions should be whether you are currently covered  
> by an NDA or other confidential agreements with Sun (err, BigCo).   
> -- justin

It's more than just Sun - that's the problem.  Sun licenses their  
code to everyone, and therefore you could be under NDA with, oh, IBM,  
because you worked on IBMs production J2SE platform which uses  
licensed Sun code...

geir

-- 
Geir Magnusson Jr                                  +1-203-665-6437
geirm@apache.org



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message