On 06/28/2010 10:10 AM, Andrzej Bialecki wrote:
On 2010-06-28 07:49, Sami Siren wrote:
One aspect that has not been discussed yet is the legal aspect.
According to http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html
there is a formal process for integrating externally development
efforts that have happened outside of Apache. Should we be
following the ip clearance process in this case too?
The concept of a "substantial contribution" that should be subject to
a software grant is somewhat tenuous, though. Keep in mind that you
do something equivalent in JIRA already - when you check the "Grant
license to ASF" box you perform a micro-grant. So the question is
whether we should go through a full grant or through the JIRA
micro-grant.
In my opinion it's ok to do the latter, since much of the code is
simply a modified version of Nutch classes - not counting GORA, of
course, but that part will be added as a third-party lib. So IMHO
it's enough to zip all source (without libs), attach it to a JIRA
issue and mark the checkbox. Then we follow the process outlined by
Chris, which imports the same codebase into our svn. What do you
think?
I do not know what is the right approach, that's why I asked the
question. Also I have not looked at the donation but the following
comment made me think it might fall into "substantial" category:
"
There has been an enormous amount of changes between the nutchbase
branch and the version on GitHub - pretty much EVERY class has been
modified + a lot of classes have been removed etc...
"
If folks agree that this is sufficient, then Dogacan& Enis - can
you please create a separate JIRA issue, prepare a patch like this,
mark the checkbox, and list all dependencies and their licenses for
those that are not already in Nutch svn?
This would be a good thing to do in any case. It would help to
understand what the donation is about and also help to decide which process
(if any) needs to be followed.
--
Sami Siren
