www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [QUESTION] Importing a project from GitHub
Date Sun, 08 Feb 2015 23:46:23 GMT
Henri,

Thanks for spotting that.

That makes the license a bit more clear.  It doesn't change the lack of
copyright headers.  How important those are is an open question, but having
them does at least allow one to say that everybody who changed those files
had a very strong chance of seeing what the licensing model is.



On Sun, Feb 8, 2015 at 7:53 AM, Henri Yandell <bayard@apache.org> wrote:

>
> On the '2 months old LICENSE.md' - looks like there was a rename (a lot of
> renaming/moving as file history seems to only b 4 months in that repo
> despite 4 year commit history).
>
> Here's the Apache LICENSE file 4 years back on the original commit:
>
>
> https://github.com/dscape/nano/commits/837da4b8258bbb72a92aa1136686d88f0af12eed/LICENSE
>
> Hen
>
> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 6:31 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunning@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Some information based on perusal of the github repo in question.
>>
>> The nano project did not obviously manage their IP cleanly.  The project
>> LICENSE file was added only two months ago (and it is clearly not identical
>> to the standard ASL, if only because of lower-casing).  None of the source
>> files appear to have license headers.
>>
>> Many of the smaller contributors have made contributions larger than 100
>> lines of code.
>>
>> I can't say what this means, but it does provide some background and
>> distinguishes the case from FlexUnit.
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Feb 6, 2015 at 8:09 AM, Alex Harui <aharui@adobe.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Apache Flex accepted FlexUnit from GitHub.  The GH community for FlexUnit
>>> had managed its IP cleanly.  The contributors signed contributor
>>> agreements giving the main contributors right to donate.
>>>
>>> -Alex
>>>
>>> On 2/6/15, 7:31 AM, "Jan Lehnardt" <jan@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> >Dear legal-discuss,
>>> >
>>> >(if this isn’t the right list to ask this, please direct be to the
>>> >correct place).
>>> >
>>> >The CouchDB community was approached by the lead developer of
>>> >https://github.com/dscape/nano to have the project become apart of
>>> Apache
>>> >CouchDB. The community has voiced some interest in pursuing this. There
>>> >has not been a vote on this yet, though, this is just to clear any
>>> >preliminary concerns.
>>> >
>>> >Is there a precedent for importing GitHub projects to the ASF?
>>> >
>>> >In particular, how do we handle the GitHub-usual main-dev-team + lots of
>>> >drive-by-contrbutors without a clear copyright assignment step in place?
>>> >
>>> >While the lead developer and copyright holder as per the projects
>>> >README.md has made the most significant contributions (412 commits /
>>> >41,036++ / 39,540--), some of the other contributors have
>>> >not-insignificant (double negative alert!) contributions (17 commits /
>>> >613++ / 53--, e.g., see
>>> >https://github.com/dscape/nano/graphs/contributors for details).
>>> >
>>> >As per ASF requirements, is the lead developer in a position to donate
>>> >the project as a whole to the ASF?
>>> >
>>> >Which, if any, of the other contributors will have to co-sign the
>>> >donation? Or put their contributions under an ICLA of their own? Or what
>>> >other things need to be done?
>>> >
>>> >FWIW, the second most prolific contributor expressed interest in moving
>>> >to the ASF with the project, all legalities covered. The rest are pretty
>>> >much inactive at this point, or have only made insignificant
>>> >contributions, that were clearly meant to be included in the main
>>> project.
>>> >
>>> >* * *
>>> >
>>> >My understanding is that getting the main contributors / active
>>> >maintainers to do a software grant and/or ICLA will do the trick, as
>>> >minor contributions that were meant to be included in the project (as
>>> per
>>> >regular ASF contributions guidelines), don’t need the legal red tape.
>>> >
>>> >That said, where do we make the cut off for significant contributions?
>>> In
>>> >the given project, my gut feeling says contributors #1 and #2
>>> >(https://github.com/dscape/nano/graphs/contributors) will cover what we
>>> >need, but I’d like to get confirmation on this before proceeding.
>>> >
>>> >Assume all the other bits (license, dependencies, community vote) would
>>> >be sorted.
>>> >
>>> >Does the above sound reasonable or am I way off on any point?
>>> >
>>> >Thank you for your advice!
>>> >Best
>>> >Jan
>>> >--
>>> >
>>> >---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>>> >For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>
>

Mime
View raw message