Hi Leo, I started replying to your email, suggesting modifications to the ICLA that would address my concerns. As this would probably lead to a very long license thread, I erased it, and I am proposing a simpler solution.
I am proposing that we strictly abide by the advertised Apache Harmony Contribution Policy at: http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/contribution_policy.html but, we add one additional condition that must be met by the ASF, and we add an explicit mention of it on signed ICLAs: 1- Current and future SableVM contributors sign the ICLA for contributing patches and possibly gaining commit rights. http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt 2- Also, contributors must complete the Authorized Contributor Questionnaire and submit to the Harmony PMC. http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/auth_cont_quest.html 3- I sign a Software Grant license (with the authorization of the appropriate SableVM authors to do so) for each bulk contribution. http://www.apache.org/licenses/software-grant.txt 4- I fill a Bulk Contribution Checklist for each bulk contribution. http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/bulk_contribution_checklist.html 5- The ASF provides me with an official, legally binding document, signed by officers that have sufficient rights to do so, stating that it will only sub-license (distribute, etc.) code contributed by SableVM authors (can be identified specifically) and derivatives of this code, under licenses that require explicit acknowledgment of the copyright of these authors and that require redistribution of the related text found in the NOTICE file. [I have no trouble letting the ASF lawyers come up with some text proposal. I would highly suggest reusing words off the Apache License 2.0 to do so. I can even propose some text, if you wish me to do so.] 6- Each ICLA and Software Grant has an explicit hand written reference to the ASF document in "5-" beside the signature(s). A copy of the ASF document in "5-" is added as an appendix to the ICLA/SG in your records and our records. I sincerely think that the above should be acceptable to all parties involved. SableVM authors would end up strictly abiding by the existing contribution policy, yet the ASF would be providing us with the security we require to acknowledge our contributions. See below for a short comment. Leo Simons wrote: >>So, for example, the ASF could sublicense >>derivatives of our work under any license it wants, without even >>acknowledging our contribution in a NOTICE file. > > "When hell freezes over..." As far as I know, the ASF has no power to control US federal and state governments. So, the ASF cannot assure me that US laws will never change in the next millennium (you never know how long the US government will extend copyright, given Disney's lobbying) as to allow Microsoft or any such party to gain control on the ASF, possibly after a bankrupt or something similar. It is very difficult to predict the future of any corporation, be it a private, public, profit or non-profit organization. So, I feel very, very uncomfortable to give a blank check to anybody. [Of course, the US government can also adopt laws that invalidate written contracts...] Hoping that my proposal above is acceptable to all. Etienne PS: It seems we're getting down to the "real" stuff... heh. -- Etienne M. Gagnon, Ph.D. http://www.info2.uqam.ca/~egagnon/ SableVM: http://www.sablevm.org/ SableCC: http://www.sablecc.org/
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
