Cool, thanks for weighing in as well, Shane!
I learned something new :)
Shane Curcuru wrote:
Alex has it right, and it's important to remember that the ASF never
asks for copyright assignment of code; we only ask for an SGA grant or a
voluntary submission from a contributor of ICLA signer. We only want a
license to be able to ship the eventual Apache project under the Apache
License v2.0.
The details on Apache source header policy, for posterity:
http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
- Shane
Alex Harui wrote on 1/15/16 11:32 AM:
AIUI, copyrights never get re-assigned. There is a collective copyright
for the collective work, but each line of code is still owned by some
entity/person that contributed it.
Copyright law apparently only allows the copyright owner or a person they
authorize to muck with copyright statements in headers, and since Apache
prefers that copyright notices go in the NOTICE file, it is a good thing
if every copyright owner is a committer so they can muck with the header
themselves. But for sure, in one case, I have gotten permission from the
copyright holder to make the changes since they did not want to be a
committer.
The SGA grants permission for the code to be licensed under ALv2, so is
not fully required when the donated code base is already under ALv2. In
such a case it sort of provides a paper trail that the code base
participants/community are ok with moving the "home" of the code to ASF
repos. There is a recent thread on that.
So, IMO, the only gotchas in this case are if the headers have this
individual's copyright in it and we want it moved to NOTICE. And if this
individual or his employer somehow tries to argue that they did not intend
to allow the contributions to be under ALv2 in the first place, or doesn't
want the ASF to be the new home for this code, which seems unlikely.
HTH,
-Alex
On 1/15/16, 5:21 AM, "Josh Elser"<josh.el...@gmail.com> wrote:
Thanks, Greg.
I thought the whole point of this part of the process was that we could
assign the copyright from the original contributors to the ASF - the thing
that licenses wouldn't be covering. That's great that this isn't a
sticking
point, I'm just honestly a bit confused.
On Jan 15, 2016 12:15 AM, "Greg Stein"<gst...@gmail.com> wrote:
Exactly ... just bring the work into the ASF under its ALv2 license. You
don't need permission from (all) contributors to use the software under
that license. That's *why* we have licenses!
Rewriting the headers is a little trickier, though. I'd suggest a two
step
process:
1) bring in the code, but don't (yet) touch any of the license/copyright
headers in there
2) ask legal-discuss what to do with the headers
Cheers,
-g
ps. I'd think: for any file jbnote touched, keep/push the existing
header
down and prepend the standard ASF header; all other untouched files,
replace any header with ours.
On Thu, Jan 14, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Alex Harui<aha...@adobe.com> wrote:
Looks like the repo was placed under the Apache License long before
this
individual contributed. So, IMO, if you are convinced this individual
and
his employer knew his contributions were placed under the Apache
License
you could gamble and accept his contributions. If you get an
objection
later, you can delete and re-implement the contributions.
My 2 cents,
-Alex
On 1/14/16, 10:45 AM, "Josh Elser"<els...@apache.org> wrote:
Hi all,
(with my podling member hat on)
We have a bit of a problem over in Slider with a code donation. Full
details can be found at
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLIDER-977
In short, an app-package (a modular chunk of code that Slider runs on
Apache Hadoop's YARN ) for Kafka was offered to be included in
Slider.
Slider would love to accept it. We've gotten IP clearance from all
but
one party who contributed to it.
To the best of my knowledge, this individual contributed code to this
Kafka app-package and his company could also lay claim to his
contribution. He already had an ICLA on file, but no CCLA from his
company.
Two months later, multiple pings on JIRA and even a personal email,
this
person seems to be AWOL. Given my understanding of the rules, we
can't
proceed because we don't have the ability to prove all potential
previous ownership of this codebase has been granted to the ASF.
Any advice on how we could try to move this forward?
Thanks.
- Josh
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
