On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 5:08 AM Sheng Wu <wu.sheng.841...@gmail.com> wrote:
> SGA is not required if the project is on a personal repository, this > SGAs can apply for individuals and corporations [1]. Doesn't matter where it's sourced from. We have received a number of SGAs in the past that just represent a single individual, or non incorporated entities that choose to be represented by a single person (see Groovy as an example). > individual's employer(if have) is recommended to submit CCLA(but needs > to evaluate by the owner about his contract) > The CCLA is really for the case where the employer explicitly wants an agreement in place indicating the contributor can contribute the code. I'm not aware of any policy we have (at Apache) requiring it. [2] More comments below specific to kvrocks. > But this isn't the Kvrocks case. > > Sheng Wu 吴晟 > Twitter, wusheng1108 > > > tison <wander4...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 16:15写道： > > > > Thanks for your inputs. > > > > Try to summarize the discussion: > > > > * Apache requires a SGA from the *current* copyright holder of the > software > > to grant permission for ASF. > We don't actually (at least not always but it does tend to be the easiest way to deal with it since most incubating projects are changing license). Work with your mentors/champion to figure this out, but if a large enough set of ICLAs is done to cover all main contributions and the source code is already Apache licensed then you may be fine. > > * If the current copyright holder is Meitu, then they should sign a grant > > with Exhibit A barely "Kvrocks". > > > > However, if the current copyright holder is "Kvrocks contributors", since > > it's a virtual entity, a certain contributor on behalf of the community > > should sign the SGA. > > > > Did I get it right? Is there some other proposal that got into the > > incubator without a SGA from a certain "company". > To answer this, you need to understand what the SGA is saying; IANAL. Section 2 makes the assumption that the grantor has permissions to be the grantor. When Meitu granted the source code, they gave whoever full rights to do whatever the grant said they can do. It wouldn't be correct to ask Meitu to file another grant, but whoever is filing the grant should ensure that what they are doing (Section 1 of the SGA) is in compliance with that grant, which would satisfy Section 2. I'm assuming that KvrocksLabs isn't a business entity, just an unincorporated group of individuals working on the project. It's fairly common that opensource projects merge code together, I'm not sure the state of KvrocksLabs before the grant that Meitu gave. TL;DR I believe someone representing KvrocksLabs can sign a SGA with the assumption that the original grant from Meitu created KvrocksLabs. Ideally that person should be whoever received the grant from Meitu. [1]: https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html#grants [2]: https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html#clas > > > > Best, > > tison. > > > > > > Sheng Wu <wu.sheng.841...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 15:42写道： > > > > > > but I think it's right that meitu should claim clearly about the > > > copyright > > > date since the > > > > > > Do you mean there is no single Meitu employee(s) was > > > working/contributed to that project ever since? > > > Because the org is virtual on GitHub, and meitu can't sign CCLA or SGA > > > to that virtual group back then, I think one way or another, Meitu > > > still need to prove the SGA from the transfer date to now. > > > It is better for meitu to sign the SGA to declare all > > > contributions(from beginning to now), others(individuals) would submit > > > their ICLA(or other companies' SGA) for some codes after the transfer. > > > > > > Sheng Wu 吴晟 > > > Twitter, wusheng1108 > > > > > > hulk <hulk.webs...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 15:06写道： > > > > > > > > Thanks for junping reply. > > > > > > > > Yes, we also agree that should grant the whole source code > repository > > > for > > > > ASF, > > > > but I think it's right that meitu should claim clearly about the > > > copyright > > > > date since the > > > > the repository was moved to another organization after then. > > > > > > > > So our question is should we need to sign extra other agreements for > > > > podling IP Clearance? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 2:57 PM 俊平堵 <junping...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > I think SGA here should be the same as other project. > > > > > As Craig mentioned above, it is code’s copyright owner ( a legal > > > entity or > > > > > natural human) to grant permission for ASF. If only for code during > > > certain > > > > > period, that means some code is not get permitted for Apache which > is > > > very > > > > > weird. :( > > > > > > > > > > hulk <hulk.webs...@gmail.com>于2022年4月25日 周一上午11:52写道： > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks all, > > > > > > > > > > > > From the meitu side, they think should claim the date clearly > > > instead of > > > > > > implicitly, > > > > > > so I'm not sure whether is ok to add this clarification on SGA or > > > not? > > > > > > If not, are there other agreements that should be signed for > podling > > > IP > > > > > > Clearance? > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 11:13 AM Sheng Wu < > wu.sheng.841...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please check the SGA template of ASF, like Craig mentioned, > > > usually, > > > > > > > there is no date/timestamp included. > > > > > > > The foundation just needs legal approval that the company > granted > > > to > > > > > > > move codes to the foundation, others(like individuals) should > > > submit > > > > > > > ICLA(s) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sheng Wu 吴晟 > > > > > > > Twitter, wusheng1108 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hulk <hulk.webs...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 10:19写道： > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the > > > project > > > > > > > > > moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner > from a > > > > > > > > > license perspective? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kvrocks has transferred from the meitu to the KvrocksLabs > > > > > organization > > > > > > > and claimed the copyright belongs to the Kvrocks community. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is there a place/way to track this event? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We didn't track this event in a public place. The lawyer > thinks > > > they > > > > > > can > > > > > > > only grant the copyright when all of the contributors are their > > > > > employees > > > > > > > (before 2020.3.23). After that, the copyright should belong to > the > > > > > > Kvrocks > > > > > > > community. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 8:29 AM Sheng Wu < > > > wu.sheng.841...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> I think IPMC don't prepare SGA, SGA(s) are from original > owners. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on > belong > > > to the > > > > > > > Kvrocks > > > > > > > >> community. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the > > > project > > > > > > > >> moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner > from a > > > > > > > >> license perspective? Is there a place/way to track this > event? > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> Sheng Wu 吴晟 > > > > > > > >> Twitter, wusheng1108 > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> tison <wander4...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 06:46写道： > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > Hi IPMCs, > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > Recently we voted and accepted Kvrocks to the > Incubator[1]. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA, we meet an > issue > > > that > > > > > > the > > > > > > > >> > original entity sign a SGA but explicit limit the > agreement on > > > > > code > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > >> > 2018 to 2020. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on > belong > > > to the > > > > > > > Kvrocks > > > > > > > >> > community. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > The issue is that since the original entity sign such a > SGA > > > and > > > > > all > > > > > > > core > > > > > > > >> > contributors sign ICLAs, is there other agreements should > be > > > > > signed > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > >> > podling IP Clearance? > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > Best, > > > > > > > >> > tison. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > [1] > > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/shxcg56j3x36t75x63voj82s6hhdtrcv > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > 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 > >
