Rod,

I would recommend always leaning towards the safe side.  The general
consensus on the general@ list is that the CCLA isn't a replacement SGA, so
including everything in it is the best.

John

On Sat Feb 14 2015 at 10:33:57 AM Rod Simpson <[email protected]> wrote:

> John,
>
> Can you clarify if we need to include all the modules in the new SGA (e.g.
> including the stack), or if the new SGA should only include the things that
> were not in the original grant (SDKs, ugh, portal).
>
> Thanks!
>
> Rod
>
> --
> *Rod Simpson*
> T @rockerston
> W rodsimpson.com
>
> On January 25, 2015 at 8:23:46 AM, John D. Ament ([email protected])
> wrote:
>
> Lewis,
>
> On Sat Jan 24 2015 at 11:11:17 PM Lewis John Mcgibbney <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> > Hi John,
> >
> > On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 6:50 AM, <
> > [email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Let me clarify a bit. I do apologize for being a bit brief on my
> > response,
> > > I just had ankle surgery and am not feeling that great afterwards :/
> > >
> >
> > All the best with recovery John.
> >
> >
> > >
> > > To be honest, I think Usergrid is about 75% there.
> >
> >
> > +1, I would say more than that. There is a solid community here. That is
> > the most important thing for me to be honest. The initial group of
> > committers have done a sterling job of promoting UG at every given
> > opportunity.
> >
> >
> > > I think if we clear up
> > > the administrative stuff we can get very close towards graduation,
> >
> >
> > This is true John. We have some issues to have addressed on the link
> below.
> > I will make best efforts to track the intricacies down and see if we can
> > get them flushed out to the page.
> >
> >
> > > but I
> > > think having one more release, which is completely clean, will be that
> > true
> > > proof the podling's ready to rock.
> > >
> >
> > Another release would be fantastic. I think the podling has proved that
> > release managers are available, keen and willing to stand up to the job.
> > This ticks the release box for me and I am not concerned about Usergrids
> > ability to produce releases.
> > Further on this point, from the initial proposal document
> > http://wiki.apache.org/incubator/UsergridProposal
> >
> > - Move the existing code base to Apache CHECK
> > - Integrate with the Apache development process CHECK
> > - Ensure all dependencies are compliant with Apache License 2.0 CHECK
> > - Set up open-source docs and website CHECK
> > - Incremental development and releases per Apache Guidelines CHECK
> >
> >
> Well, technically we're still struggling w/ bullet 3. As Justin pointed
> out, we still have some issues w/ our notice and license files.
>
> Specifically where I'm concerned is under "Weak Copy-left" from here
> http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html (CDDL license specifically)
>
> The issues with one of the files was exactly what this calls out and just
> makes me nervous to say there is no other in the source base. Obviously
> the easiest way to ensure it doesn't exist any longer is to remove the
> dependencies from the code base but that's a pretty large effort.
>
> At some point we should plan to go file by file and make sure it's not
> questionable. There are some questionable files I see in launcher that use
> a very odd format, not quite the format I see in the rest of the code
> base. The fact that they don't use imports and everything is the FQCN
> makes me think it came from elsewhere.
>
>
> >
> >
> > > What needs to be updated on here?
> > >
> > > http://incubator.apache.org/projects/usergrid.html
> > >
> > > - Podling Name Search - since Apigee donated Usergrid, I'm assuming
> > Apigee
> > > has already signed over the name to the ASF. Do we have record of this
> > > somewhere?
> > >
> >
> > Mmmmm. This is fuzzy right now. The initial proposal adds no value here
> > either. If we cannot get formal verification that this has taken place
> down
> > at Apigee then I think we should kick off a podling name search
> > http://incubator.apache.org/guides/names.html#search
> >
> >
> At this point, I've started on some of the leg work around this. It's
> obviously looking good at this point (the platform's been around long
> enough that the only similar term showing up is "a list of users within a
> grid"
>
>
> >
> > >
> > > - If you have a full list of committers at this point, we should make
> > sure
> > > the page gets updated with everyones username.
> > >
> >
> > Where on minotaur can I locate this info. Do you know? I will flush it
> out.
> >
> >
> Ha. I've found this to be a pain. When committers get added they're put
> into the "incubator" group - we don't create ldap groups for podlings.
>
> What I think would be easiest is to just run through the mail archives and
> see whenever someone's been voted in as a committer, make sure they've
> filed an ICLA and actually created an apache id. I've dealt with a podling
> a while ago where they voted tons of people in as committers - I think
> upwards of 40 people. Of those 40, 8 actually went through the process of
> signing up with Apache.
>
> Ultimately, when creating the TLP resolution we should only list out
> active
> committers, people who haven't contributed during incubation should be
> very
> carefully looked at.
>
> John
>
>
> >
> > >
> > > - Dates are important for many of these sections. It seems to me like
> > much
> > > of this is complete, but I personally don't know the dates in which it
> > > occurred. We should make sure those get updated.
> > >
> >
> > ACK.
> >
>
>

Reply via email to