openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kay Schenk <kay.sch...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: What rights are given in an SGA
Date Mon, 21 Jan 2013 23:28:21 GMT


On 01/21/2013 10:59 AM, Rob Weir wrote:
> Since this has come up recently, I'd like to point you all to a recent
> thread on the legal-discuss list:
>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/201301.mbox/browser
>
> If you are not familiar with the SGA form, you can see it here:
>
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/cla-corporate.txt
>
> As you can see, it is a combined Corporate CLA and Software Grant
> Agreement.  Notice it does not speak of the Apache License, but it
> does offer its own copyright and patent license.
>
> The license portion in question was this:
>
> "Grant of Copyright License. Subject to the terms and conditions
>        of this Agreement, You hereby grant to the Foundation and to
>        recipients of software distributed by the Foundation a perpetual,
>        worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge, royalty-free, irrevocable
>        copyright license to reproduce, prepare derivative works of,
>        publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute
>        Your Contributions and such derivative works."
>
> The question was:  What does "software distributed by the Foundation"
> mean?  Does that mean only releases?  Code in SVN?  What exactly?
>
> As you can read in the archives, the response was that stuff in SVN is
> considered "distributed by the Foundation", so the license of the SGA
> applies to contributions made under SGA and checked into Subversion.
>
> But note also Roy's later clarifying response:
>
> "The dev subversion repo is not a means of distributing to the
> "general public".  It distributes to our self-selected development
> teams that are expected to be aware of the state of the code being
> distributed.
>
> When we distribute to the "general public", it is called a release."
>
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-legal-discuss/201301.mbox/browser
>
> That was the basis for the DISCLAIMER I put in the root of our
> Subversion a couple of days ago:
>
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/openoffice/DISCLAIMER
>
> I don't think this is anything new.  We already know that code that
> we're releasing requires careful review and verification of file
> headers, LICENSE and NOTICE files, etc.  That is part of what it means
> to publish a release at Apache.  But we have other stuff in Subversion
> that we do not intend to include in a release, and for which we do not
> make this effort.  For example, /devtools, /ooo-site and /symphony.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>

Thanks for posting this. I think it does clarify some 
issues/conversations of late.



-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
MzK

"No act of kindness, no matter how small, is ever wasted."
                                  -- Aesop

Mime
View raw message