incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Guillaume Laforge <glafo...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: ICLA/CCLA/SGA guidelines for GitHub or multi-entity projects was: [Groovy] Next steps...
Date Thu, 26 Mar 2015 13:22:47 GMT
We've only seen positive messages from the community at large about the
move, all supporting and praising the decision, in various forms, whether
on our mailing-lists, or twitter, etc.
So the community is already aware of it and supports this move.

On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Martijn Dashorst <
martijn.dashorst@gmail.com> wrote:

> Would the discussion on the dev@groovy list be enough 'evidence' for
> the intent of the community to move to Apache?
>
> Then it would possible be sufficient to archive those messages for
> posterity (but I'm no lawyer)
>
> Martijn
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 2:06 PM, Guillaume Laforge <glaforge@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > So ultimately, what do we do?
> > Do I (current Groovy project lead, thus project representative) need to
> > sign something "on behalf of the Groovy community" or something like
> that?
> > Or we just skip this step altogether since that's the community's
> intention
> > as a whole?
> >
> > On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 1:59 PM, Benson Margulies <bimargulies@gmail.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> If a single legal entity has the copyright, the entity makes a grant.
> >> If the code was built by a large community under the apache license,
> >> there's no one to make a grant. 'The community' expressing its desire
> >> to move to Apache is enough. This is an edge case of the principle
> >> that we only accept code when the copyright owner has a positive
> >> intent to contribute it; there's no way to test that for everyone who
> >> ever made a 2-line patch. Reference Subversion, I think.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 8:40 AM, C├ędric Champeau
> >> <cedric.champeau@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> In the case of groovy, does Pivotal own it or does someone else own
> it?
> >> >
> >> > Nobody owns it.
> >> >
> >> >>   If
> >> >> I look at https://github.com/groovy/groovy-core/blob/master/NOTICE
> it
> >> >> indicates that an entity known as "The Groovy community" owns it, in
> >> which
> >> >> case the SGA should probably come from them, no?  Or is "The Groovy
> >> >> community" not a legal entity?
> >> >>
> >> >> The Groovy community is not a legal entity. A lot of people
> contributed
> >> to
> >> > Groovy already, and in the Groovy ecosystem, the community is a notion
> >> > larger than the language itself.
> >>
> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> >> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
> >>
> >>
> >
> >
> > --
> > Guillaume Laforge
> > Groovy Project Manager
> >
> > Blog: http://glaforge.appspot.com/
> > Social: @glaforge <http://twitter.com/glaforge> / Google+
> > <https://plus.google.com/u/0/114130972232398734985/posts>
>
>
>
> --
> Become a Wicket expert, learn from the best: http://wicketinaction.com
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>
>


-- 
Guillaume Laforge
Groovy Project Manager

Blog: http://glaforge.appspot.com/
Social: @glaforge <http://twitter.com/glaforge> / Google+
<https://plus.google.com/u/0/114130972232398734985/posts>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message