On Sat, Jan 14, 2012 at 2:09 PM, Jason Porter <[email protected]> wrote: > Of course, I don't deal with legal matters, but would the simplest way be to > have a statement from someone representing Red Hat that code from Seam 3 and > Solder is permissible to use?
That would be great. Failing that, taking all contributions on the merits of their individual authors' copyright ownership is fine too; I'd just like for us to be more explicit about it. Thanks for your quick response (and sorry you had to read the original message on a phone ;) ), Matt > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Jan 14, 2012, at 13:00, Matt Benson <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi all, >> Deltaspike is a bit unusual as podlings go: its code is not a >> "drop" from one single source (which would typically be accompanied by >> a software grant), nor is its code grown entirely from nothing. Part >> of the incubation process requires the necessary precautions be taken >> to ensure that the project's IP is not encumbered in any way. I'm not >> here to scold folks, but now that I step back and take in the >> landscape, I am not fully comfortable with our process thus far wrt >> absorbing code from the various points of ingress we all represent. >> I'll go on: >> >> Firstly, it's simply a fact that the CODI code is a non-issue: it's >> been grown under the auspices of an Apache TLP and there is no reason >> to doubt that it remains as unencumbered now as ever. I mention this >> because it's not at all like I or anyone else is of the "old boys >> club" mentality or any such nonsense; I'm just categorizing the >> DeltaSpike codebase as it now stands. Thus far, I am concerned by the >> Solder-based code. For example, the copyright notice at >> https://github.com/seam/solder/blob/develop/impl/src/main/java/org/jboss/solder/reflection/annotated/AnnotatedTypeBuilder.java >> (this is pretty clearly the same code as currently lives in the >> DeltaSpike repo) says "Copyright 2011, Red Hat, Inc. and/or its >> affiliates, and individual contributors by the @authors tag". The >> @authors tag cites Stuart Douglas and Pete Muir, so I read the notice >> as saying that copyright is shared between these individuals and Red >> Hat for this particular file. Fine; both Stuart and Pete have filed >> their ICLAs and have received their accounts (I've not checked the >> other files, but I assume they are similarly attributed). However, >> Jason actually committed the code. This is not necessarily wrong; Red >> Hat does have a corporate CLA on file with the ASF, and Jason is a Red >> Hat employee. IMO then the only thing missing is an unequivocal >> statement on the parts of the Red Hat-employed DeltaSpike committers >> that any of them (or, in this case, at least Jason) is authorized to >> license whatever Solder, etc. code he sees fit, on Red Hat's behalf, >> to Apache for inclusion in the DeltaSpike codebase. Just because Red >> Hat has filed the CCLA does not mean that every line of their code is >> now up for grabs, and I see nothing to this explicit effect in the >> incubation proposal, so that connection from point A to point B is >> essential. We must be able to show clear provenance for any code that >> we bring in, regardless of the source, so again, please don't feel >> "singled out." The builder code is the first example I thought of, >> and I'm pretty sure that nothing has, as yet, been added from source >> other than CODI/Solder. Now, if the Solder code is rather to be >> contributed on the basis of the individual authors' copyrights, making >> sure everything that has already been added is kosher will require a >> little more work, but ultimately the situation is the same: one of >> the copyright holders needs to have been responsible for licensing the >> code for ASF use, although it is fine by me if that authorization >> comes in blanket form and I'm perfectly willing to take committers at >> their word wrt to the Red Hat or any similar situation. Finally, if >> and when we do end up with any code being officially licensed from Red >> Hat rather than from the individual authors (or if I've misinterpreted >> the spirit of the Solder copyright notice), then Red Hat would also >> need to be credited in the project's NOTICE file. >> >> Thanks in advance for addressing my concerns (or pointing out what >> I've missed that proactively addressed them), >> Matt
