incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "John D. Ament" <johndam...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Adopting non-ASF AL projects (was Re: [DISCUSS] Kudu incubator proposal)
Date Wed, 25 Nov 2015 23:02:56 GMT
If we use groovy as an example, a single contributor provided an SGA and
signed it himself.  no other contributors signed the SGA.

On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 1:01 PM Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:

> Renaming thread since my question doesn't have anything to do with Kudu.
>
> I'm trying to resolve Greg's "opt-out" response, vs Roy's "blessing of the
> original authors" in the link to the archives Owen posted.  I've always
> assumed that the "blessing..." part meant that any non-ASF code base, even
> ones under AL, had to come in with an SGA signed by ALL of the original
> copyright holders.
>
> Specifically, there are two code bases under AL where the major
> contributors have indicated that they would like our project to take over
> change-control.  These donations have been held up by trying to chase down
> all of the folks who made smaller contributions and getting them to sign
> an SGA.  There really isn't any community around these code bases right
> now, but our project is interested in them because under ASF practices,
> they can at least get occasional attention without the major contributors
> having to be involved.
>
> Is an SGA needed?  If not, is there a recommended practice for providing
> notification such that folks who want to opt-out can find out the
> change-control for code base is moving to the ASF?
>
> Thanks,
> -Alex
>
> On 11/24/15, 8:01 PM, "Owen O'Malley" <omalley@apache.org> wrote:
>
> >On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 7:39 PM, Greg Stein <gstein@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, Nov 23, 2015 at 12:46 PM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On 11/23/15, 8:23 AM, "Mattmann, Chris A (3980)"
> >> > <chris.a.mattmann@jpl.nasa.gov> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > >Alex,
> >> > >
> >> > >Please re-read my email. As I stated we don’t take code that
> >> > >authors don’t want us to have. So far, we haven’t heard from any
of
> >> > >the authors on the incoming Kudu project that that’s the case. If
> >> > >it’s not the case, we go by the license of the project which
> >>stipulates
> >> > >how code can be copied, modified, reused, etc.
> >> >
> >> > Yes, but my interpretation of your words is that folks have to opt
> >>out,
> >> >
> >>
> >> Correct: opt-out.
> >>
> >> Since this code is under ALv2, we can import it to the ASF under that
> >> license. We have always done stuff like this, including other permissive
> >> licenses.
> >>
> >> But this isn't simply importing a library, this is saying "the ASF is
> >>now
> >> the primary locus of development for >this< code." And that's where
> >>people
> >> can say, "woah. I hate you guys. don't develop my code there", and so we
> >> nuke it.
> >>
> >> SGA/iCLA is to give us rights that we otherwise wouldn't have (ie. the
> >>code
> >> was under a different license).
> >>
> >
> >It is worth looking back at the thread on Bloodhound
> ><
> http://www.google.com/url?q=http%3A%2F%2Fmail-archives.apache.org%2Fmod_m
> >box%2Fincubator-general%2F201201.mbox%2F%253C0F2EA54E-4419-428F-A604-46EF5
> >9C40469%2540gbiv.com
> %253E&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNG4tmh9dY86HFVyRZlTE66tCjvh
> >Kg>
> >.
> >
> >The important thing is that Apache doesn't fork communities. In this case,
> >the community wants to move to Apache. That is great and should be
> >allowed.
> >They shouldn't need to get an explicit permission from each contributor
> >over the years.
> >
> >.. Owen
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>

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