Just to close out this thread, the software grant was received and the PR should be good to go. -- Jody Garnett
On Sun, 2 Feb 2020 at 22:05, sjudeng <sjud...@gmail.com> wrote: > Jody, > > I think the Software Grant should be all set. Does that mean we no longer > need to wait for CLA signatures from the other contributors? Can review of > the PR move forward now? https://github.com/geotools/geotools/pull/2749 > > On Sun, Jan 26, 2020 at 1:43 AM Jody Garnett <jody.garn...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> That document can be used two ways: >> a) let an organization list several employees as working on their behalf; >> b) donate some code (which you could name) in bulk >> >> If you wanted to package up some code (a mix of your own work and public >> domain work) and donate it to OSGeo you could do so. The document would >> not be a perfect fit but you could fill it out as an individual (not an >> organization), list “not applicable” for employees as nobody is working on >> your behalf, and then name the software component being donated. >> — >> Jody >> >> On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 8:36 PM sjudeng <sjud...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Jody, >>> >>> Thanks again for the detail in the other thread on this. It sounds like >>> there's a good path forward and it might be close, which is great news. A >>> couple questions are below to help me better understand what you had in >>> mind. I apologize I can't readily make one of the bi-weekly GeoServer >>> meetings so I hope we're able to resolve this here. >>> >>> You mentioned packaging everything up, which I think is done for >>> GeoTools in the open PR: https://github.com/geotools/geotools/pull/2749. >>> If that is successful then I have another PR I can submit for the >>> corresponding GeoServer module. I looked at the Software Grant you >>> mentioned. It looks like it's the same as the Corporate CLA? I'm not sure >>> how to fill it out. Who is the "corporation" in this case? Would I list the >>> other contributors that are in the PR as "designated employees" and then >>> that's how we'll be able to move forward on the PR without getting >>> individual/corporate CLAs signed for each of them? Once it's merged what if >>> a new contributor wanted to contribute to the module but also couldn't sign >>> the CLA? >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 7:18 AM sjudeng <sjud...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi Jody, >>>> >>>> I am not a government employee or contractor and I don't have insight >>>> into whether or how the CLA issue involving the government contractor >>>> contributor might be resolved. I think it's reasonable to assume that it is >>>> not something that will be addressed in the foreseeable future. >>>> >>>> Is the recommendation that I remove the attribution to the government >>>> contractor contributors in the relevant commits to resolve this issue? What >>>> about the non-government contributors that I just don't get a response from >>>> regarding the CLA signing request? Is removing author attribution >>>> permissible under LGPL, and eventually GPL if/when the same process is >>>> repeated on the GeoServer side? Even if permissible it's definitely >>>> something I would like to avoid if at all possible as I think all >>>> contributors (government and non-government) should receive attribution for >>>> their work. >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 10:45 AM Jody Garnett <jody.garn...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> You can email a PDF, and many programs let you sign a PDF. >>>>> >>>>> For us government often the work is often public domain, so can be >>>>> picked up and contributed by an individual side stepping many of these >>>>> issues. >>>>> >>>>> We have some history of trying to untangle use of CLAs between NGA and >>>>> OSGeo, and NGA and Eclipse Foundation. >>>>> >>>>> A key thing we want established is that *an employee (or contractor) >>>>> has the governments permission to release the code as open source*. >>>>> As a technicality the Apache CLA we use tends to have each paragraph >>>>> discuss both the "permission to act" (which NGA can grant) and "copyright" >>>>> (which NGA cannot grant since public domain requirement) in the same >>>>> paragraph. Their legal time tried to add "As applicable" to each paragraph >>>>> of the CLA, rather than to just the sentence on copyright ... >>>>> >>>>> If you want to pursue this with NGA management we can do so via Open >>>>> Source Geospatial Foundation, they have been stuck on this for *years*. >>>>> >>>>> On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 7:03 PM sjudeng <sjud...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Jody and Andrea, >>>>>> >>>>>> Just to update on this, I did reach out to ElasticGeo contributors. I >>>>>> think some will be able to sign and are just slowed by the current >>>>>> print/scan process to submit. Others I am still awaiting a response from. >>>>>> In at least one case I don't think the CLA will be signed as the work was >>>>>> done under a U.S. Government contract and thus would require Government >>>>>> CLA >>>>>> signature, which is unlikely. >>>>>> >>>>>> Is there any other recourse here to get this brought under OSGeo >>>>>> GeoTools/GeoServer without all secondary contributors signing the OSGeo >>>>>> CLA? Since ElasticGeo is released as LGPL (GeoTools-side) and GPL >>>>>> (GeoServer-side), is the inclusion of the associated source code not >>>>>> similar to the inclusion of similarly licensed third-party dependency >>>>>> libraries, which include contributors that haven't signed the OSGeo CLA? >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 8:18 PM sjudeng <sjud...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Hello again, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I reached out to ElasticGeo contributors regarding CLA signing and >>>>>>> in the meantime have opened a PR with the contribution to GeoTools. I'll >>>>>>> keep an eye on the CI build and work through any issues that come up. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://github.com/geotools/geotools/pull/2749 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 1:41 AM Andrea Aime < >>>>>>> andrea.a...@geo-solutions.it> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Jan 13, 2020 at 3:11 AM sjudeng <sjud...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Hi all, >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> If there is interest I'd like to try again to get ElasticGeo >>>>>>>>> contributed to GeoTools/GeoServer as a community module. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I don't remember about previous attempts... but you're welcomed to >>>>>>>> donate the module indeed, it's a good move! >>>>>>>> Is it the same store provided at ngageoint? >>>>>>>> https://github.com/ngageoint/elasticgeo >>>>>>>> Yeah, I see you as the primary contributor there. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Cheers >>>>>>>> Andrea >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> == >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit >>>>>>>> http://goo.gl/it488V for more information. == Ing. Andrea Aime >>>>>>>> @geowolf Technical Lead GeoSolutions S.A.S. Via di Montramito 3/A >>>>>>>> 55054 Massarosa >>>>>>>> <https://www.google.com/maps/search/Via+di+Montramito+3%2FA%0D%0A55054++Massarosa?entry=gmail&source=g> >>>>>>>> (LU) phone: +39 0584 962313 fax: +39 0584 1660272 mob: +39 339 8844549 >>>>>>>> http://www.geo-solutions.it http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it >>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------- *Con >>>>>>>> riferimento alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg. UE >>>>>>>> 2016/679 - Regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si >>>>>>>> precisa che ogni circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo >>>>>>>> contenuto, gli eventuali allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza è >>>>>>>> riservata al/i solo/i destinatario/i indicati dallo scrivente. Se il >>>>>>>> messaggio Le è giunto per errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra >>>>>>>> operazione è illecita. Le sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene >>>>>>>> notizia. >>>>>>>> This email is intended only for the person or entity to which it is >>>>>>>> addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential >>>>>>>> or >>>>>>>> otherwise protected from disclosure. We remind that - as provided by >>>>>>>> European Regulation 2016/679 “GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of >>>>>>>> this >>>>>>>> e-mail or the information herein by anyone other than the intended >>>>>>>> recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email by mistake, >>>>>>>> please >>>>>>>> notify us immediately by telephone or e-mail.* >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> -- >> -- >> Jody Garnett >> >
_______________________________________________ GeoTools-Devel mailing list GeoTools-Devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geotools-devel
