Hey- Paul Spencer wrote: > I feel this is covered by > >> "The OpenLayers PSC will ask the GeoExt PSC to provide evidence that >> code contributions are free from encumbrances. Further, the >> OpenLayers PSC will provide guidance to the GeoExt PSC if it appears >> that GeoExt is in violation of any other criteria of an OSGeo member >> project." > > I *think* you are suggesting that this be done before accepting ... I'm > +1 on accepting the proposal as is, OpenLayers PSC is not accepting the > copyright, just accepting a role in ensuring that the project is run in > a way that is acceptable to OSGeo. > > When a project enters incubation, it doesn't have to have complete > processes before starting. You are proposing that we impose more > rigorous rules on a project that isn't even trying to enter incubation. >
Exactly. Nobody is asking OpenLayers to do what OSGeo does during the incubation process. I really want to limit what we are asking the OpenLayers PSC to take on. Again, nothing is required (legally or otherwise) to assign copyright to OSGeo. This is simply a courtesy. I'd like to take up the subject separately with OSGeo - requesting that they provide a set of guidelines that projects follow before assigning copyright. Tim > Paul > > On 30-Mar-09, at 9:56 PM, Cameron Shorter wrote: > >> I'm answering to this email from an "Incubation Committee" member more >> than as an "Open Layers PSC" member. >> >> I applaud GeoExt's embracement of OSGeo principles and assigning of >> their license to the OSGeo. This will increase adoption and mitigate the >> risk of future legals battles if done right. >> >> However, there is more to be done than just assigning copyright of the >> project. You also need to protect the code base from being polluted >> intentionally or accidentally with incompatibly licensed code. >> >> OSGeo projects protect themselves by setting up processes for their >> committers to follow and sign up to, which include rules for accepting >> new code and new members. >> >> I suggest that this proposal is extended to include some of these >> processes. (You might be able to cut and paste the Open Layers >> processes, or use them outright). >> >> I'll vote positively after this has been addressed. >> >> Tim Schaub wrote: >>> Hey- >>> >>> So, I'm picking up the GeoExt governance proposal again. >>> >>> Please see the links below for a history of the issue [1], [2]. >>> >>> The executive summary follows: GeoExt is a new project that brings >>> OpenLayers functionality to Ext JS widgets and data utilities. The >>> GeoExt PSC would like to assign copyright for the code to OSGeo. OSGeo >>> suggested that out of courtesy, the GeoExt PSC make a proposal to an >>> OSGeo member project asking the member project to accept a role in the >>> governance of the new project. >>> >>> The responsibilities of this role (for the OpenLayers PSC and for the >>> GeoExt PSC) are described here: >>> >>> http://www.geoext.org/trac/geoext/wiki/governance >>> >>> What does this mean for the OpenLayers PSC? >>> ------------------------------------------- >>> The OpenLayers PSC will ask the GeoExt PSC to provide evidence that code >>> contributions are free from encumbrances. Further, the OpenLayers PSC >>> will provide guidance to the GeoExt PSC if it appears that GeoExt is in >>> violation of any other criteria of an OSGeo member project. >>> >>> What does this means for the GeoExt PSC? >>> ---------------------------------------- >>> The GeoExt PSC will gather signed license agreements from code >>> contributors. It will provide a report (periodically or generated on >>> demand) all contributors and status of their CLA. In addition, the >>> GeoExt PSC will continue to govern the project in a way that conforms >>> with the guidelines for OSGeo member projects. >>> >>> What does this *not* mean? >>> -------------------------- >>> The OpenLayers PSC will *not* be responsible for examining the commit >>> logs, tracking down code contributors, asking individuals to sign the >>> CLA, or any duties that have to do with technical aspects of managing >>> the GeoExt project. The OpenLayers PSC will also *not* vote on issues >>> before the GeoExt PSC. >>> >>> Why is this happening? >>> ---------------------- >>> See the links below for a little history. Basically, anyone can assign >>> copyright to OSGeo. Frank Warmerdam suggested that the OSGeo would >>> probably be happier about having copyright assigned if a current member >>> project accepted some role in the governance of the new project (the one >>> assigning copyright). OSGeo doesn't have any real responsibility for >>> the non-member projects that assign it copyright. By extension, >>> OpenLayers does not assume any real liability under this agreement (its >>> status as a member project is not jeopardized if the terms of the >>> agreement are not met). This is largely a courtesy to the OSGeo. >>> >>> >>> So, as a member of the OpenLayers PSC, I'd like to propose that we >>> accept this role in the governance of the GeoExt PSC. I'm happy to >>> answer any more specific questions about what this means. >>> >>> Thanks for the vote and/or questions. >>> >>> Tim >>> >>> [1] http://n2.nabble.com/copyright-question-td2088465.html >>> [2] http://n2.nabble.com/proposal-for-GeoExt-governance-td2477185.html >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> Cameron Shorter >> Geospatial Systems Architect >> Tel: +61 (0)2 8570 5050 >> Mob: +61 (0)419 142 254 >> >> Think Globally, Fix Locally >> Geospatial Solutions enhanced with Open Standards and Open Source >> http://www.lisasoft.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Dev mailing list >> Dev@openlayers.org >> http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev > > > __________________________________________ > > Paul Spencer > Chief Technology Officer > DM Solutions Group Inc > http://research.dmsolutions.ca/ > -- Tim Schaub OpenGeo - http://opengeo.org Expert service straight from the developers. _______________________________________________ Dev mailing list Dev@openlayers.org http://openlayers.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
