www-legal-discuss mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "John D. Ament (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Comment Edited] (LEGAL-310) Handling of IP Clearance for non-incubating projects
Date Sat, 17 Jun 2017 21:51:00 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-310?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16053005#comment-16053005
] 

John D. Ament edited comment on LEGAL-310 at 6/17/17 9:50 PM:
--------------------------------------------------------------

Ok, thanks.

So i just want to get a few more things clarified.

The incubator docs are contradictory in this area (e.g.  "This is not for new projects" -
http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html vs "It is required" - http://incubator.apache.org/guides/mentor.html#initial-ip-clearance
).  We've had a few slip ups mostly because I believe the contradictory texts leave people
confused on what to do and ultimately I would like to consolidate it down to a single guide
on how to handle IP Clearance which combines text from both sources.  Do you agree that IP
Clearance is required for all projects coming in + all new code bases a TLP is about to accept
from a 3rd party?  Obviously its a single developer, single source and that person is making
the contribution and its tracked via JIRA and other provenance I'm assuming it's OK.

In addition, I'm assuming based on this that an IP Clearance + SGA are expected.  E.g. we
need to be responsible to vet that the donated source code passes all of our requirements.
 SGA is useful for changes in license, or open sourcing something previously closed source.

I also believe that treating this as a 72 hour "lazy consensus" is wrong.  Someone needs to
actually check the code out and make sure nothing is wrong with it.


was (Author: johndament):
Ok, thanks.

So i just want to get a few more things clarified, as the incubator docs are contradictory
in this area (e.g.  "This is not for new projects" - http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html
vs "It is required" - http://incubator.apache.org/guides/mentor.html#initial-ip-clearance
).  We've had a few slip ups mostly because I believe the contradictory texts leave people
confused on what to do and ultimately I would like to consolidate it down to a single guide
on how to handle IP Clearance which combines text from both sources.  Do you agree that IP
Clearance is required for all projects coming in + all new code bases a TLP is about to accept
from a 3rd party?  Obviously its a single developer, single source and that person is making
the contribution and its tracked via JIRA and other provenance I'm assuming it's OK.

In addition, I'm assuming based on this that an IP Clearance + SGA are expected.  E.g. we
need to be responsible to vet that the donated source code passes all of our requirements.
 SGA is useful for changes in license, or open sourcing something previously closed source.

I also believe that treating this as a 72 hour "lazy consensus" is wrong.  Someone needs to
actually check the code out and make sure nothing is wrong with it.

> Handling of IP Clearance for non-incubating projects
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: LEGAL-310
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-310
>             Project: Legal Discuss
>          Issue Type: Question
>            Reporter: John D. Ament
>
> Suppose that:
> - A project is a TLP
> - A company or some other entity has made signfiicant modifications to an Apache product
> - Said entity indicates they would like to give the code back to the ASF
> The process around this situation is ambiguous at best, confusing realistically.  Presently,
the IPMC is responsible for managing IP Clearance.  The secretary is responsible for filing
SGAs.  The relationship between IP Clearance and SGA is undefined, but it seems like they
should be an either-or.  
> An SGA, as I've understood it, is to relicense code under the Apache license for the
sake of a donation to the foundation.  Likewise, an IP clearance is to ensure that already
licensed code is valid (valid being a term I've just made up, trying to indicate that the
code is all Apache-v2, from some author(s) and can be used in entirity without changes to
license).
> In the scheme of things, there seems to be things missing that aren't called out in this
flow.  Specifically, if a company has already provided an SGA, there should not be a need
for an IP Clearance and it should not be on the IPMC to review said IP if it is not going
towards an incubating project.  The IPMC cannot tell another TLP that their IP is wrong. 
Or maybe they can and this needs to be clarified (e.g. this shouldn't be a lazy consensus
vote since we are responsible here).
> So basically:
> - The IPMC is or is not responsible for confirming these IP clearances
> - If so, then the IPMC is or is not responsible for guiding projects (Podlings &
TLPs) on how to handle (SGA vs IPC)
> - If the IPMC is responsible, then giving a proper vote for any new IP coming in
> http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-74
> http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-general/200804.mbox/%3c2C7D21B3-CA23-4086-809C-3B5ECC8EE7D5@gbiv.com%3e
> http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/httpd-mod_domain-clearance.html
> http://www.apache.org/foundation/records/minutes/2003/board_minutes_2003_12_17.txt
> {quote}
> B. Discussion: code imports directly into projects vs incubation
>        (e.g. maven-wagon and ws-fx)
>        A discussion was had on how codebases arrive at the ASF.  Last
>        year, the Board created the Apache Incubator Project to deal
>        with these incoming codebases, primary to ensure that the
>        proper IP guarantees have been made, and also to ensure that
>        any community arriving with the code is aware of ASF processes
>        and requirements.
>   
>        However, there are many cases where codebases happen to have
>        been elsewhere by ASF committers, which makes it much easier to
>        "bring the code [into the ASF]". The Board is crafting
>        guidelines for when a codebase can be directly imported and
>        verified by a PMC, and when it is required to use the Incubator
>        for that process. Information will be posted to
>        general@incubator.apache.org when those guidelines have been
>        completed.
> {quote}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.4.14#64029)

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


Mime
View raw message