Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAOqetn9PsRHbb_C60_JdLHZFJ2pzeqNm3z26Fk+D0+3NqduzJA@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CABD8fLU3BWAWzavuF9F=JzenPhzV0JO=4WXCQo+9BsbpvPdQJQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAFG6u8E5r7amKF6f8SSDV_TZJ4yREh2qx13m8pc3TZTZaahu0g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABD8fLXWN4f4iCkbehoXG+4DfMj1_CYiUn5k1qE9sY1Zy0Qh3w@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAFG6u8ESJ7gtXi+iS4Njh1fC_wrzHGUOxJBaSHb+G-_PjScirg@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABD8fLWTVdSjVCSTAVqRhKZ2g_dmnjaWX6qDXdA9ZW341edw8g@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOqetn_d7LZ325xrS1OB3zbX_amrqVoxY80s07yHN-Mg5oQE4A@mail.gmail.com>
	<CABD8fLXOs3_4MY_9qYcRytwtibOSNnM+Ei+Z3riU9nnrxzS_Hw@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAOqetn9PsRHbb_C60_JdLHZFJ2pzeqNm3z26Fk+D0+3NqduzJA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 21:11:21 -0500
Message-ID: 
 <CABD8fLVPPRDqQtJ=JAUX9o=jHL7JkB_XkeYO=DZQ6ZP2+ZUBCw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Short form IP clearance
From: Greg Stein <gstein@gmail.com>
To: general@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1143879ce463ff0522a802c6

--001a1143879ce463ff0522a802c6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 8:45 PM, John D. Ament <johndament@apache.org>
wrote:

> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 9:40 PM Greg Stein <gstein@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I believe a PMC is capable of performing IP clearance itself. They have a
> > VP that is an Officer and can take responsibility for the Foundation in
> > matters of that Project. The forms/recording are valid, so I haven't
> > suggested changing that (tho I'd like to see them move under /legal/, I'm
> > not fussed about their location).
> >
> > I would hope that a PMC includes a note in their report to the Board,
> that
> > they filed a clearance form. That is just natural reporting. But that is
> > quite different from one TLP being subject to another TLP's vote (whether
> > lazy consensus or not).
> >
> > There could certainly be an argument that a PMC needs to be
> double-checked
> > by $entity. But that kind of second-guessing means $entity needs to
> > double-check all commits and all release artifacts. We trust PMCs to get
> > their IP done correctly, as they work on their project and make releases.
> >
>
> What you're saying makes a lot of sense.  I've always questioned the
> benefit of TLPs submitting IP Clearances to the incubator, but not
> questioned it because they're so few and far between it's irrelevant.
>

I get a bit crazy-headed when I perceive the ASF encroaches on the
independence of a TLP. This isn't really a case of the ASF imposing, but
similar. In my view, the Incubator cannot impede/affect the independence of
another TLP. Structurally. The Foundation creates each PMC as an
individual, independent group. Thus, I believe a few of these steps are
just incorrect. I'd like our documentation to reflect the reality of the
independence of our TLPs.

I would however pressure that podlings are not capable of completing this
> on their own, and that they should continue to follow the processes defined
> already.  They have knowledgeable mentors, but we should generally note
> that the IPMC as a whole is responsible for the podlings.
>

Absolutely! The referenced page (and the associated guide) explicitly state
it is for existing projects only. (the language could be clarified as "TLP,
not podling", but yeah: definitely not for podlings)

Cheers,
-g

--001a1143879ce463ff0522a802c6--