www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Committers' hobby projects
Date Tue, 28 Feb 2012 22:37:03 GMT
On Mon, Feb 27, 2012 at 22:13, Roy T. Fielding <fielding@gbiv.com> wrote:
> On Feb 27, 2012, at 5:33 PM, Greg Stein wrote:
>> This is covered by our "short form" IP clearance in the Incubator:
>>  http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html
>> Roy said a person can just "check it in" (ie. option A), but I don't
>> think that is really true.
> Yes, it is true.  This question has been asked and answered before.

"Answered" means written down rather than tucked away in a mailing
list somewhere. It's unfortunate that Robert's attempt to fix the
written-down portion got blocked :-/ (per your reference to the 2008

>> Recognize that the software has been
>> developed outside of our community engagement. Suddenly turning this
>> large piece of code into "Apache code" is generally considered
>> improper. We don't normally let people develop entire products
>> *outside* of the ASF community process, then dump it into source
>> control, and then call it ASF code.
> Sure we do.  See Shambhala.  As long as all of the contributors have
> a CLA on file and all the contributors agree to the contribution,
> then it is covered under those CLAs.  All paperwork complete.
> It doesn't matter where the code was stored in the past.

Hehehe... That's a pretty poor example. Shambhala was contributed by
Robert Thau. The same Robert Thau who has no ICLA on file. No
Membership Agreement. No Grant. Nothing. Of course... that's because
the Foundation didn't even *exist* in 1995 when he committed Shambhala

> http://markmail.org/message/zkzsung623jtfa7x

As Benson notes, there are two things going on in the thread: the
simple IP clearance you describe in the reference thread. Then we have
the PMC oversight issue that I'm worried about with
externally-developed projects magically appearing at Apache.

The "short form" should be fixed up to be just that: short, per your

I might tweak that suggestion in one way: if there are multiple
committers (eg. the project was collaboratively developed outside of
the ASF), then there should be (3) PMC +1's on the short form. That
would demonstrate active awareness by the PMC at the time of
contribution (rather than a lazy acknowledgement at release time).
With that tweak, I think my (and Alex?) concerns about Bad Committers
misusing the Apache brand.

(and if the code is developed by just one person, then their ICLA is just fine)


To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org

View raw message