www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)" <Ross.Gard...@microsoft.com>
Subject RE: CCLA executed (Follow-Up)
Date Fri, 02 Jan 2015 03:34:16 GMT
Apache addresses only..

Ms. Williams has asked to speak with me about this matter. I'm setting up the meeting.

I don't believe this is a legal issue, if it starts to sound like one then I will defer to
Jim as VP Legal. 

Can someone please explain to me why Ms. Williams says:

" but after I raised questions about how her  contributions would affect our current contract
and contract renewal  she was excluded from further participation in the Apache NiFi  Incubator
Project."

Specifically, what does she mean "excluded from further participation"?

Ross

-----Original Message-----
From: shaposhnik@gmail.com [mailto:shaposhnik@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Roman Shaposhnik
Sent: Thursday, January 1, 2015 2:21 PM
To: private@incubator.apache.org
Cc: Benson Margulies; Joe Witt; legal-discuss@apache.org; secretary; legal@onyxconsults.com;
Teresa Jackson; private@nifi.incubator.apache.org
Subject: Re: CCLA executed (Follow-Up)

Ms. Williams,

let me try to weigh in on this issue in my official capacity of the current VP/Chair of Apache
Incubator:

On Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 1:25 PM, zaminah_williams <zwilliams@onyxconsults.com> wrote:
> Benson,
>
> I would like to keep legal copied for this particular discussion.

I really don't think there's anything here for legal to be concerned with, but I'll keep them
CCed if you insist.

>  I do understand what you're conveying and I do appreciate your 
> willingness to come to a resolution.  One of the issues that we are 
> facing is that Onyx employed an individual (Joe mentioned in previous 
> email) that contributed and executed an ICLA while under our employment.

Are you saying that the company now questions the legality of that ICLA?
If not -- lets assume that your company was and is fine with that individual filing an ICLA
while employed.

> This individual was identified by Joe as one of the small core members 
> of the Apache NiFi Team. This individual contributed from December 
> 2013-September 2014, but after I raised questions about how her 
> contributions would affect our current contract and contract renewal 
> she was excluded from further participation in the Apache NiFi 
> Incubator Project. Due to her exclusion she then became frustrated and resigned. I have
attached her resignation to support this claim.
> This is something that you and Apache should be aware of.

Thank you for bringing this to our attention. Personally I do not see this event as material
to the discussion at hand, but I do acknowledge understanding the facts you are stating.

> What I am now being told is that now that this individual is no longer 
> affiliated with Onyx Consulting Services that we can move forward with 
> no acknowledgement or attribution of her past efforts and contribution 
> in the Apache NiFi proposal as a committer while affiliated with Onyx. 
> Benson please understand that this is something that I cannot accept.

Let me see if I get this straight:
  1. An individual in question was working on some functionality of what
   today is known as Apache NiFi (incubating) *prior* to submitting
   a proposal for the incubating.

   2. On 11/19/14 Joe Witt started a *discussion* thread around proposing
   NiFi for Apache Incubation. The original text of the proposal did NOT
   list the individual in question in the initial committers section.

   3. On 11/21/14 Benson Margulies started an official IPMC vote on whether
   to accept NiFi for Apache Incubation. The text of the proposal still did NOT
   list the individual in question in the initial committers section.
On top of that
   between 11/19 and 11/21 nobody asked the question of whether the proposal
   needs to be modified to include said individual.

   4. On 11/24/14 Benson Margulies closed the official IPMC vote on whether
   to accept NiFi for Apache Incubation as PASSING.

   5. This means that the window between 11/19/14-11/24/14 was not utilized
   to add said individual to the proposal via the normal mean. While I would
   agree that the window size of 5 days is small, it is not atypical at all.

If I get this flow of events right here what we have right now is an individual
who:
    1. is no longer employed by your company
    2. was not mentioned on the proposal between 11/19/14/-11/24/14

At this point we can NOT turn the clock back. If you desire the optics of that individual
being mentioned on the original proposal -- it is too late for that.

If the issue at hand, however, is for that individual to be recognized as one of the committers
on the project based on past experience with the code base -- this is *really* easy to accomplish.
As Benson said, all that needs to happen is for that individual to show up on the mailing
list and asked to be included.

The only point where you advocating for that individual would be required is a *extremely*
unlikely event of the project pushing back on a *personal* request.

Does this make things clear?

> The ICLA and CCLA were
> signed and we were both excited to move forward, but because this 
> individual was excluded we have lost a key and critical resource.

While it may be true that your company lost a critical resource it would be completely orthogonal
to whether that resources is still available to work on Apache NiFi (incubating). As Benson
pointed out, as soon as that individual shows up and asks for being included -- the usual
ASF community management process is going to kick-in and the likelihood of this individual
to be added to the project in the official capacity of a committer is extremely high.

A key point to realize here is this: at ASF we do NOT associate participation in the community
with the employment status. This is simply not negotiable.
This is one of the pillars of the "Apache Way".

Thanks,
Roman.

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

Mime
View raw message