+1 Benedict <bened...@apache.org> 于2023年10月7日周六 18:27写道：
> +1 > > On 7 Oct 2023, at 10:03, Mick Semb Wever <m...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > LEGAL-658 > > > On Fri, 6 Oct 2023 at 17:43, J. D. Jordan <jeremiah.jor...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> The software grant agreement covers all donated code. The ASF does not >> need any historical agreements. The agreement giving the ASF copyright etc >> is the Software Grant Agreement. Yes, any future work done after donation >> needs to be covered by ASF CLAs. >> >> But happy to see someone ask legal@ to confirm this so we can move >> forward. >> >> On Oct 6, 2023, at 3:33 AM, Benedict <bened...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> >> Are we certain about that? It’s unclear to me from the published >> guidance; would be nice to get legal to weigh in to confirm to make sure we >> aren’t skipping any steps, as we haven’t been involved until now so haven’t >> the visibility. At the very least it reads to me that anyone expected to be >> maintaining the software going forwards should have a CLA on file with ASF, >> but I’d have expected the ASF to also want a record of the historic CLAs. >> >> On 6 Oct 2023, at 09:28, Mick Semb Wever <m...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> On Thu, 5 Oct 2023 at 17:50, Jeremiah Jordan <jeremiah.jor...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I think this is covered by the grant agreement? >>> >>> https://www.apache.org/licenses/software-grant-template.pdf >>> >>> 2. Licensor represents that, to Licensor's knowledge, Licensor is >>> legally entitled to grant the above license. Licensor agrees to notify >>> the Foundation of any facts or circumstances of which Licensor becomes >>> aware and which makes or would make Licensor's representations in this >>> License Agreement inaccurate in any respect. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Oct 5, 2023 at 4:35:08 AM, Benedict <bened...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>>> Surely it needs to be shared with the foundation and the PMC so we can >>>> verify? Or at least have ASF legal confirm they have received and are >>>> satisfied with the tarball? It certainly can’t be kept private to DS, >>>> AFAICT. >>>> >>>> Of course it shouldn’t be shared publicly but not sure how PMC can >>>> fulfil its verification function here without it >>>> >>> >> >> Correct, thanks JD. >> >> These are CLAs that were submitted to DS, not to ASF. >> >> It is DS's legal responsibility to ensure what they are donating they >> have the right to (i.e. have the copyright), when submitting the SGA. It's >> not on the ASF or the PMC to verify this. Here we're simply demonstrating >> that we (DS) have done that due diligence, and are keeping record of it. >> >> >> -- you are the apple of my eye !
