Many thanks Dave for replying. Justin - thanks for replying. I think Dave has answered most of the questions. The reason this thread is copied to both ACS PMC and general@ is because this was intended as a starting point for ACS PMC and it was not clear to me how the IP clearance process works. The IP clearance wiki is under incubator but the ACS project is not in incubator. Hope you understand the underlying premise requires the discussion to be held publicly (i.e. understand the process, get an officer or understand how to do it wrt our case) - I think there is nothing that needs to be discussed in secrecy.
Again thanks all, I think I've received all the help and guidance I need and we got an IP clearance officer/ASF member volunteer (Paul). I agree with Dave's summary - the ACS PMC has voted and agreed with the initiative, all major contributors have agreed too on the relicensing and initiative, Sander has already re-licensed the codebases and submitted ICLA and software grants doc. The ASF secretary has also acknowledged Sander's ICLA, and now we're just waiting for their grants acknowledgement because Paul can start the vote on general@. (Pl correct/advise if we need to do anything else or missed anything else, thanks) Regards. Regards. On Tue, Jun 22, 2021 at 8:57 PM Dave Fisher <w...@apache.org> wrote: > Hi - > > This IPMC member is finding this whole discussion circular. > > I’m including this link [1] from the discussion on legal-discuss@ which > did include replies from other contributors. > > [1] > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r9d0eab51653bfa6ead4b61e2ea0a7b435c0d3195ff1ed2ae3fdeb8f0%40%3Clegal-discuss.apache.org%3E > > IMO - This is spot on and the most that is required here is that: > > (a) The Cloudstack PMC wants to include the software, and understands the > risk in the rare and unlikely case that any of the original contributors > wants to deny use. If that happens then the PMC will handle the situation > as all PMCs must. If there is a failure there then that is a Board > situation. > (b) A SGA has been provided which indicates that Hashicorp considered that > all license and ownership issues are moot. OR - Sander’s ICLA and now > current holding of the software. > > > > > On Jun 22, 2021, at 7:56 AM, Justin Mclean <jus...@classsoftware.com> > wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > Please stop mixing public and private lists. Feel free to forward any > email to the relevant private list but don’t mix them as it's very easy for > something that should only appear on a private list to become public. > > > >> The codebases are under Sander's control who also was the original/main > author who had maintained the repo under the 'hashicorp' Github org, and > all top 5 contributors (including Sander) have agreed to the initiative > including re-licensing under APLv2 (already done now). > > > > There are more than 5 major contributors and I’m not sure that your top > 5 contributors have actually agreed. Please provide documentations that > shows this. > > If you followed the thread above: > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r3a96f1220393409c3ca2ce619786fb23fdac3b334a00584d26cf1ecd%40%3Clegal-discuss.apache.org%3E > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r7e9b5767102ddfa3b871f6252d4fa8ef5e6ff8c8af044b314991682a%40%3Clegal-discuss.apache.org%3E > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r522c7ef78f19bd60f6f3c156e607e4b655e7683d7f7f176731b9d617%40%3Clegal-discuss.apache.org%3E > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r43ba1d098675bb48e4fed80e34b2123364e9a1e3bbf98223bfda2ad7%40%3Clegal-discuss.apache.org%3E > > > > > > If you look at the IP clearance documentation it states "Either an > Individual CLA or Corporate CLA is preferred to a Software Grant. All > authors must sign an Individual CLA; or all owners of IP must sign one of > the three documents and send to secretary” > > > > Has this been done? > > Justin - you seem to be asserting ownership rights where there may be none. > > > > > >> I don't see why we need permission from Hashicorp (the company) but > feel free to advise: > >> https://github.com/xanzy/terraform-provider-cloudstack > >> https://github.com/xanzy/go-cloudstac > > > > Who owns the IP? Just because Sander is the original author of some of > the code doesn't mean he owns the IP. If he did the work while he was > employed by Hashicorp (and I don't know if this was the case) it’s likely > they own the IP not him, but his employment contract may have stated > something else. Again the same applies for the other contributors. > > We have no need to see employment contracts. Since Hashicorp transferred > the project to Sander then he has the rights AFAICT. > > > > > A further complication is the code wasn’t under a license that is > compatible with the Apache license. > > > > I’m not sure that due diligence has been done here, please provide > documentation that shows otherwise. > > I think that this IP Clearance will need an actual vote (as I don’t think > it will be lazy consensus.) > > All The Best, > Dave > > > > > > Kind Regards, > > Justin > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > > >
