incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jean T. Anderson" <...@bristowhill.com>
Subject Re: [doc] ways to bring code into the ASF
Date Tue, 18 Apr 2006 20:40:51 GMT
Justin Erenkrantz wrote:
> On 4/17/06, Jean T. Anderson <jta@bristowhill.com> wrote:
> 
>>I'm finding this part of the process puzzling,
...
> 
> The general rule of thumb is that we'd like to have CLAs on-file for
> all code imports.  This way we can relicense the contributions under a
> new license.

I was still confused, but remembered vaguely you had written something
recently clarifying code grants. And I found it in February wrt OFBiz:
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/200602.mbox/%3c5c902b9e0602080944u178d4a8h8011ecf2738da38c@mail.gmail.com%3e

in that post you wrote:
> The software grant is our preferred mechanism for code bases that can
> be collectively licensed as a whole and submitted that way -
> especially so for code that 'skips' Incubation (like the FOP example).
>  For those projects coming to the Incubator that have a single
> copyright holder (like BEA, IBM, etc.), the software grant is the
> cleanest approach as well.
> 
> But, for OFBiz (like SA), no entity has the authority to relicense the
> work and submit it to the ASF in the form of a software grant. 
> Therefore, we need CLAs from everyone who contributed at a minimum. 
> We could conceivably ask for a grant, but if we decided to execute a
> software grant form for every OFBiz contributor, it would be a
> bureaucratic nightmare as well.  -- justin

I think this is what needs to be captured into the incubator docs.
The process for bringing in code from a single entity has been worked
out pretty well; bringing in code that's already open source not from a
single entity has been more confusing.

> But, if the code is already ALv2-licensed and we can't get CLAs, it
> won't be the end of the world; but we'd need to note that somehow so
> that the next time we rev our license, we don't rev that portion as we
> don't have the bits to license that under another license.

how about ALv1.1? That's what the external cayenne codebase is under
according to the proposal at
http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/CayenneProposal .

thanks,

 -jean


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


Mime
View raw message