incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "robert burrell donkin" <>
Subject [POLICY][DOC] IP clearance process refinements
Date Sun, 19 Mar 2006 12:26:04 GMT
A few observations from following the process as currently documented
and proposals for improvements:

1 this process can only be executed by a ASF member or officer with
incubator karma. this needs to be documented on the clearance form.

PROPOSAL: document this and add section on form so that it's clear who executed

do we need a name for this role?

2 there is no tie between grant.txt and the incubator IP clearance.
this makes oversight difficult.

PROPOSAL: the clearance form should include the official name for the
grant as recorded in grants.txt.

3 there is no indication the form which CLA's and CCLA's are relevant.
this makes oversight difficult.

PROPOSAL: the form should include official names (as listed in the
foundation documents) for those donating the code.

4 there is no tie to the actual donated software. this makes oversight

PROPOSAL: the md5 for the donation should be listed on the form. the
repository URL where the actual donated is/will be checked in should
be listed.

should this be in the incubator repository or in the project?

5 the VOTE from the project receiving the code is unnecessary and
confusing. it serves no useful legal purpose and normal apache process
can handle objections when the code is committed.

PROPOSAL: scrap this requirement

i think that these proposals are uncontroversial (representing how the
process is expected to work) and so can be dealt with by lazy
consensus. so unless i hear any objections, i'll update the documents
in a day or two...

- robert

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message