www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Joe Witt <joe.w...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: CCLA executed (Follow-Up)
Date Fri, 02 Jan 2015 04:39:45 GMT
ugh.  I replied to the wrong thread.   This day...

Ross,

Her comment there about exclusion as do many others in the thread appear to
be one of a contractual nature and do not at all involve the ASF which made
further responses impossible.  Her concerns will be brought to the
attention of the appropriate officials.

I do not understand why she is asserting that anyone is being excluded from
further participation in an Apache context.  She has been told several
times on this thread alone how simple it is to join a project.

Nobody was or will be excluded from participating as per normal Apache
processes.  Whether a contract exists for her company to get paid to
contribute, however, is an entirely different matter and certainly one that
would be between her company and any entity that might choose to do so.  I
have no role in contracting so however that voodoo happens is magic to me.

Nothing did prohibit their involvement and nothing has - nor has anyone
else been excluded.  Now, as she noted one of the employees has left that
company.  As of yesterday that former employee sent an e-mail to our dev
mailing list indicating her interest to contribute (see below link).  Why
that didn't happen sooner is a question for the individual.  Though I think
Ted's e-mail just sent does appear to reveal the actual reason which is she
was advised not to by her employer.

http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-nifi-dev/201501.mbox/%3CCALJK9a76WvFxgqqU0oZJiXe%3DFAc0%3DooJD5gcLXVnOZapq%3DALOg%40mail.gmail.com%3E

Her claims about things I may or may not have said I have chosen to avoid
responding to.

I am truly sorry for the distraction that this has caused.  We just want to
be a normal healthy podling working our way to learning and demonstrating
the Apache Way.  I am grateful for the support we've received and we hope
to just get back to the work of growing a community.

Thanks

On Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 11:28 PM, Roman Shaposhnik <roman@shaposhnik.org>
wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 1, 2015 at 8:16 PM, Ross Gardler (MS OPEN TECH)
> <Ross.Gardler@microsoft.com> wrote:
> > Roman,
> >
> > Let me speak to her one on one. I only got involved because she was
> escalating in every direction. Remember,
> > as President I have no real authority in this matter but this is not
> something she understands since it is unusual
> > and certainly not what her own title of "President/CEO" means. As a
> Director I have some authority, but I doubt
> > the 8 other directors (not to mention the Membership) would take kindly
> to me meddling in the VP Incubators
> > business without good reason, so I will have no opinion as a Director
> either.
> >
> >
> > My goal is simply to stop the escalation in its tracks while also giving
> her a chance to explain precisely what her
> > concern is. At the end of the call I will simply be referring it back to
> the right people (most likely IPMC).
>
> Sure. Makes sense.
>
> > If I have you in the call then it will be a very different conversation
> to the one I want to have since you are the
> > one with the authority to take action here (though I hope you would
> defer to the mentors and PPMC members).
> > That being said, if you really feel it is necessary to join I have no
> objection and will ensure you get an invite,
> > just be aware of my objectives as stated above.
>
> No I think you're right. Lets see if you meeting with here would resolve
> it.
>
> > Finally, I don't think your reply below answers my question. What I'm
> trying to understand
> > is *who* did the excluding that Ms. Williams refers to.
>
> The question doesn't make sense, since it references a non-existent
> (at the time)
> entity: Apache NiFi. If we were to re-state her question in such a way
> that it
> does make sense then if would be about exclusion of somebody from
> participating
> in a non-ASF collaboration. From what she said so far -- there was a
> contract
> re-negotiation and it is NOT clear which side ultimately pushed for
> dropping the
> individual from collaboration. It must have been, of course, approved by an
> officer of their company.
>
> 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