Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

In it's first month+ of existence, Harmony has attracted quite a bit of attention, and we are now settling down to resolve some of the issues we've identified in the beginning. We have on our website our proposed policy framework to monitor contributions and technology contributions. This

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Tuesday 26 July 2005 04:46, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > We have the following outstanding issue that I will be talking to the > Apache Incubator PMC about - parts of the community have asked that > we change our default license for mail list contributions to a > license compatible with the

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

While in general I try to steer clear from licensing discussions these days (been too long a part of the Linux crowd in general and LKML in particular), I do strongly feel that we should not dilute the ASL by making "an exception" or "changing a default license". The good thing about the ASL (unli

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Jul 26, 2005, at 12:06 AM, Niclas Hedhman wrote: On Tuesday 26 July 2005 04:46, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: We have the following outstanding issue that I will be talking to the Apache Incubator PMC about - parts of the community have asked that we change our default license for mail list co

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

--On July 26, 2005 8:04:57 AM +0200 Henning Schmiedehausen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: particular), I do strongly feel that we should not dilute the ASL by making "an exception" or "changing a default license". +1. -- justin ---

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Jul 26, 2005, at 2:04 AM, Henning Schmiedehausen wrote: While in general I try to steer clear from licensing discussions these days (been too long a part of the Linux crowd in general and LKML in particular), I do strongly feel that we should not dilute the ASL by making "an exception" or "c

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

--On July 28, 2005 12:34:02 PM -0400 "Geir Magnusson Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The modified BSD, X11, and the Intel license are GPL compatible :) EDONTCARE. The license on our projects is ALv2. It isn't X11 or BSD or anything else. (Not to mention, they have *substantially* weaker pr

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Jul 28, 2005, at 12:38 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: --On July 28, 2005 12:34:02 PM -0400 "Geir Magnusson Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The modified BSD, X11, and the Intel license are GPL compatible :) EDONTCARE. The license on our projects is ALv2. It isn't X11 or BSD or anyth

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Thursday 28 July 2005 22:59, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > Sure - every mail list at the ASF has been understood to be under the > Apache License for contributions, and if you choose to submit > something to a mail list that isn't intended for people to use, you > mark it as "NOT A CONTRIBUT

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: The problem we have run into is that there are community members who wish to have at least the work that comes out of mail list discussions to be able to be used in their GPL-ed code. Now, it's our interest as a project to produce things with the widest usability

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

--On July 28, 2005 2:20:03 PM -0400 "Geir Magnusson Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The discussion is related to creating a policy for contributions made to the *mail list* that works for everyone. No, that's not how it works. Changing the license terms for contributions posted to the mail

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Jul 28, 2005, at 3:34 PM, Justin Erenkrantz wrote: --On July 28, 2005 2:20:03 PM -0400 "Geir Magnusson Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The discussion is related to creating a policy for contributions made to the *mail list* that works for everyone. No, that's not how it works. T

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Jul 28, 2005, at 12:25 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote: On Thursday 28 July 2005 22:59, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Sure - every mail list at the ASF has been understood to be under the Apache License for contributions, and if you choose to submit something to a mail list that isn't intended for peopl

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Jul 28, 2005, at 3:25 PM, Niclas Hedhman wrote: On Thursday 28 July 2005 22:59, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: Sure - every mail list at the ASF has been understood to be under the Apache License for contributions, and if you choose to submit something to a mail list that isn't intended for peo

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

Been watching this debate and thought I should chime in that Sun has more than one community where the *source* is under one license (say LGPL for instance) but the *mail lists* are explicitly under more liberal terms of use. Why are you all assuming that they mail list must be under a sou

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Jul 28, 2005, at 5:02 PM, Danese Cooper wrote: Been watching this debate and thought I should chime in that Sun has more than one community where the *source* is under one license (say LGPL for instance) but the *mail lists* are explicitly under more liberal terms of use. Why are you a

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Jul 28, 2005, at 2:02 PM, Danese Cooper wrote: Been watching this debate and thought I should chime in that Sun has more than one community where the *source* is under one license (say LGPL for instance) but the *mail lists* are explicitly under more liberal terms of use. Why are you all a

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

Hi Roy, On Thu, 2005-07-28 at 13:52 -0700, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > Note, however, that the people crying about the community terms > are a bunch of idiots. They already require their contributors to > assign copyright to the FSF. As such, the mailing list discussion > is completely irrelevant t

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Jul 28, 2005, at 5:12 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote: Nice Harmony spirit there. A nice spirit would be to stop blindly believing everything the FSF says about compatibility, particularly on their ridiculous license compatibility list, and instead use your own brain to read the license. Just lik

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Thu, 2005-07-28 at 13:52 -0700, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > > ASF mailing lists are protected to some degree by the community's > acceptance that the work done on those lists will be distributed > under the Apache license. We have a legal argument (not a slam dunk) > that nobody could possibly pa

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Jul 28, 2005, at 6:19 PM, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote: Could we not make it a slam dunk by putting some text in the confirmation email sent when you subscribe to the mailing list saying "you hereby agree that all email sent to this address are implicitly licensed as ASL2"? Yes.

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

Roy T. Fielding gbiv.com> writes: > I have been helpful for the past ten years and have seen nothing > but intentional obstruction from the FSF. Think about that. Roy, I have thought about that, and, speaking for myself, I'd like to thank you for being helpful for the past ten years. I would

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

Dear Roy, Of course I have "used my own brain" to read the licenses, thought about the incompatibilities and come to the conclusion that with a bit of good will on all sides we could probably come up with some legal hacks to circumvent the issues. And I am also surprized and frustrated that the co

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Jul 28, 2005, at 9:19 PM, Sanjiva Weerawarana wrote: On Thu, 2005-07-28 at 13:52 -0700, Roy T. Fielding wrote: ASF mailing lists are protected to some degree by the community's acceptance that the work done on those lists will be distributed under the Apache license. We have a legal argu

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Jul 29, 2005, at 5:02 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote: When we started Harmony we all assumed that the FSF and ASF would talk out their differences about ASL and GPL in the long run and that we could and should just start cooperating on the technical level. Yes, that is our intention still. Why

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

Is the problem you see due to a misunderstanding? The word is "sublicense", not "relicense"... On Jul 29, 2005, at 12:41 AM, Dalibor Topic wrote: Roy T. Fielding gbiv.com> writes: I have been helpful for the past ten years and have seen nothing but intentional obstruction from the FSF. T

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

Geir Magnusson Jr. apache.org> writes: > > Is the problem you see due to a misunderstanding? > > The word is "sublicense", not "relicense"... > Aha! As Geir was polite to try to explain to me what makes sublicensing different from relicensing, let me have another try, this time with an even s

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

Hi Geir, On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 08:06 -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > On Jul 29, 2005, at 5:02 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote: > > When we started Harmony we all assumed that the FSF and ASF would talk > > out their differences about ASL and GPL in the long run and that we > > could and should just sta

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Jul 28, 2005, at 9:41 PM, Dalibor Topic wrote: I'd like to sublicense all of ASF's ASL2 licensed Works in Source form and distribute those sublicensed Works to others under a GPL2/LGPL/ASL2 triple license (like Mozilla) on, say, cowgirls.kaffe.org. Is that fine with the ASL2? My impression i

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Friday 29 July 2005 21:14, Dalibor Topic wrote: > Does adding a MIT licensed creative haiku on software licensing into each > source file of an ASF work allow the NNUOFOTMITSL to redistribute the > thereby created Derived Work (which includes ASFs code) as a whole under > the MIT license, or und

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Jul 29, 2005, at 9:35 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote: Hi Geir, On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 08:06 -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: On Jul 29, 2005, at 5:02 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote: When we started Harmony we all assumed that the FSF and ASF would talk out their differences about ASL and GPL in the

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

Roy T. Fielding gbiv.com> writes: > > On Jul 28, 2005, at 9:41 PM, Dalibor Topic wrote: > Hi Roy, thank you very much for your polite, fast and detailed reply. Let's substitute the MIT license for the GPL/LGPL/whatever, since it is less restrictive and considered to be acceptable for the ASF

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Jul 29, 2005, at 3:33 PM, Dalibor Topic wrote: Can I redistribute Apache Derby, unmodified, under the MIT license? No, the MIT license is insufficient to meet the terms of the Apache license. Looking at the ASL2, it seems that I can chose my terms for Derivative Works as a whole freely, as

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

Roy T. Fielding gbiv.com> writes: > > On Jul 29, 2005, at 3:33 PM, Dalibor Topic wrote: > > Can I redistribute Apache Derby, unmodified, under the MIT > > license? > > No, the MIT license is insufficient to meet the terms of the > Apache license. Thanks for the fast reply, Roy. Could you elabo

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Jul 29, 2005, at 6:38 PM, Dalibor Topic wrote: Thanks for the fast reply, Roy. Could you elaborate a bit on what the MIT license specifically lacks to meet the terms? The parts that aren't in the ASL2, particularly in regards to retaining the NOTICE file's notices. Yes, provided the lice

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

Roy T. Fielding gbiv.com> writes: > > On Jul 29, 2005, at 6:38 PM, Dalibor Topic wrote: > > > Thanks for the fast reply, Roy. Could you elaborate a bit on what the > > MIT > > license specifically lacks to meet the terms? > > The parts that aren't in the ASL2, particularly in regards to > ret

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

may i suggest that a practical workaround for the issue (that started this debate) would be to ask all contributors to use jira. i should think that it would be possible to add another checkbox to allow contributors to give explicit permission for dual licensing (ASL and GPL). (i can't resist addi

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Jul 30, 2005, at 7:36 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote: may i suggest that a practical workaround for the issue (that started this debate) would be to ask all contributors to use jira. LOL. Yes, we're going to use JIRA. That's not the issue at all - we're talking about the mailing list.

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On 7/31/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jul 30, 2005, at 7:36 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote: > > > may i suggest that a practical workaround for the issue (that started > > this debate) would be to ask all contributors to use jira. > > LOL. Yes, we're going to use JIR

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

robert burrell donkin wrote: > On 7/31/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>On Jul 30, 2005, at 7:36 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote: >> >> >>>may i suggest that a practical workaround for the issue (that started >>>this debate) would be to ask all contributors to use jira. >> >>L

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Jul 31, 2005, at 4:36 AM, robert burrell donkin wrote: On 7/31/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Jul 30, 2005, at 7:36 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote: may i suggest that a practical workaround for the issue (that started this debate) would be to ask all contributo

RE: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

robert burrell donkin wrote: > Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > > robert burrell donkin wrote: > > > may i suggest that a practical workaround for the issue (that started > > > this debate) would be to ask all contributors to use jira. > > LOL. Yes, we're going to use JIRA. That's not the issue at al

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On 7/31/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > IMHO the whole concept of a default license for a mailing list is > > problematic. it's hard to see how we could ensure that users have > > given knowing consent. > > Well, you won't be able to subscribe without seeing it, would the

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On 7/31/05, Sam Ruby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > robert burrell donkin wrote: > > On 7/31/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > with the ASL2, apache is covered through the license but AIUI this > > does not extend to sublicensing. personally speaking, i do not accept > > new fi

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Jul 31, 2005, at 9:57 AM, robert burrell donkin wrote: On 7/31/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: IMHO the whole concept of a default license for a mailing list is problematic. it's hard to see how we could ensure that users have given knowing consent. Well, you won't be

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On 7/31/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Jul 31, 2005, at 9:57 AM, robert burrell donkin wrote: > > > On 7/31/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> . personally speaking, i do not accept > >>> new files contributed through the lists which do not have t

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Sun, Jul 31, 2005 at 05:20:17PM +0100, robert burrell donkin wrote: > i wonder whether JIRA could be persuaded to present some sort of click > through documentation reminding users that apache is only interested > in unencumbered original contributions. The SpamAssassin Bugzilla installation ha

RE: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > robert burrell donkin wrote: > > i wonder whether JIRA could be persuaded to present some sort of click > > through documentation reminding users that apache is only interested > > in unencumbered original contributions. > The SpamAssassin Bugzilla installation has cust

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Jul 31, 2005, at 12:20 PM, robert burrell donkin wrote: On 7/31/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Jul 31, 2005, at 9:57 AM, robert burrell donkin wrote: On 7/31/05, Geir Magnusson Jr. <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: . personally speaking, i do not accept new files

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

Hi, On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 14:26 -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > On Jul 29, 2005, at 9:35 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote: > > On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 08:06 -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > >> On Jul 29, 2005, at 5:02 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote: > >>> Why we > >>> are proposing to just use MIT/X for any ha

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Jul 31, 2005, at 2:05 PM, Mark Wielaard wrote: Hi, On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 14:26 -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: On Jul 29, 2005, at 9:35 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote: On Fri, 2005-07-29 at 08:06 -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: On Jul 29, 2005, at 5:02 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote: Why we are

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Monday 01 August 2005 02:05, Mark Wielaard wrote: > > Having our codebase in SVN under anything > > but the Apache License is going to be a non-starter. > > Yeah, it would be a shame if we had to move the SVN repository to > somewhere else. Maybe we should just hope we keep harmony bug free

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

robert burrell donkin gmail.com> writes: > On 7/30/05, Dalibor Topic kaffe.org> wrote: > > Could you list the parts of the ASL2 are relevant for a license to be > > ASL2-compatible? > > all of them :) Thank you for your reply, Robert! That clears up my confusion a bit. > IMHO the free softw

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On 7/31/05, Dalibor Topic <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > robert burrell donkin gmail.com> writes: > > On 7/30/05, Dalibor Topic kaffe.org> wrote: > > IMHO the free software foundation's theory of implicit patent grants > > being embedded in the GPL is quite novel. > > For a humanely readable d

RE: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

Dalibor Topic wrote: > > IMHO the free software foundation's theory of implicit > > patent grants being embedded in the GPL is quite novel. > For a humanely readable description of how it works (by > a patent attorney), see > http://www.iusmentis.com/computerprograms/opensourcesoftware/patentrisk

RE: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

> [It] sounds as if the patent license termination is automatic > as soon as the law suit is filed, rather than something that > may or may not happen at the patent owner's discretion. A patent holder can always explicitly provide a patent grant to the litigant. --- Noel ---

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Monday 01 August 2005 03:51, Noel J. Bergman wrote: > Consider that Microsoft has its own implementation of .NET. Contributing > to Mono would in no way prevent Microsoft from later enforcing its patents. > It would simply spread the infection further and faster, particularly if > people accep

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On 7/31/05, Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Or is USA so much different from the rest of the world, where "in good faith", > "intent of the law", "reasonable" and "common sense" still have legal > meaning? You didn't read Groklaw in the last three years, didn't you? :-) Btw, what's t

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On Monday 01 August 2005 04:44, Jochen Wiedmann wrote: > On 7/31/05, Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Or is USA so much different from the rest of the world, where "in good > > faith", "intent of the law", "reasonable" and "common sense" still have > > legal meaning? > > You didn't rea

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

On 8/1/05, Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Monday 01 August 2005 04:44, Jochen Wiedmann wrote: > > On 7/31/05, Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Or is USA so much different from the rest of the world, where "in good > > > faith", "intent of the law", "reasonable" and "c

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

--On August 1, 2005 2:33:51 AM +0800 Niclas Hedhman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Isn't it possible that the ASF mailing lists and policies stay the way they are, and that each of the Harmony contributors provide a LGPL license separately for all code/patches provided (in advance or each post) f

RE: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

--On July 31, 2005 12:54:59 PM -0400 "Noel J. Bergman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Uh ... it already does. We added that ages ago. Are you asking for a change, or just unaware? Unaware. Doh. (Cue Guido's time machine.) -- justin ---

RE: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > The FSF demands copyright ownership on all code - which means > that they don't allow their contributions to be available > under any other license. In contrast, the ASF only asks for > a copyright license and we don't care what other licenses you > grant other people.

Re: Harmony Podlling Quarterly Report

The FSF demands copyright ownership on all code - which means that they don't allow their contributions to be available under any other license. In contrast, the ASF only asks for a copyright license and we don't care what other licenses you grant other people. IIRC, the FSF assignment gives ba