This could be a complicated (and very important!) subject, but let me try to simplify this conversation a bit: on your project website I see this: "© 2014 NFLabs Inc" Presumably, NFLabs Inc is the legal entity that holds the rights to the entire codebase. If that's the case, is there any chance we can pull an officer of the company into this conversation?
Thanks, Roman. On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 1:52 AM, Anthony Corbacho <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > Maybe we should ask to people who contribute the most? because asking for > people who did only one commit doesnt make sence to me. > But maybe i am wrong. > > Lets ask to our mentor to help us to clarify this. > > > And in the Apache License, there is a point about contribution (I am not > sure if i understand it right) > "5. > > > > > > > > *Submission of Contributions. Unless You explicitly state otherwise,any > Contribution intentionally submitted for inclusion in the Workby You to the > Licensor shall be under the terms and conditions ofthis License, without > any additional terms or conditions.Notwithstanding the above, nothing > herein shall supersede or modifythe terms of any separate license agreement > you may have executedwith Licensor regarding such Contributions*. > > " > > > > On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 5:59 PM, moon soo Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > >> My guess is if there're code from non-CLA contributor, we can say it's >> Apache 2 license while "by submitting a patch you agree on Apache2 license" >> is effective. >> And if the contributed code has author tag, i guess keeping them in source >> code would okay for copyrights while non-CLA contributor does not specify >> any special condition for distribution, we can use and redistribute the >> code according to Apache2 License. (i guess that's one reason why some >> apache projects have source code with author tag) >> >> Also i have an experience that i've contributed few lines of code to a >> project which was using Apache2 license, and later the project went into >> Apache incubator. But i didn't get any email asking about SGA agreement. >> (now it is TLP) >> >> I'm not an expert either. I think it's better to wait for help from mentor >> or ask someone know clearly about it before sending all people SGA request. >> >> Best, >> moon >> >> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 5:27 PM, Alex B. <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > I'm not en expert, but as far as I understand code *Copyright* and >> > *verification >> > of Distribution Rights* (Licences of the dependencies) are different >> > things\activities. >> > And looks like both are needed for IP Clearance (although >> > http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/ does not exit for a while, >> says >> > google cache) >> > >> > My question was more about only the mandatory procedure which must be >> done >> > before bringing any code to the new apache repo, which I'm not sure what >> > exactly is :) >> > My educated guess is in prev. email but it would be really nice to have a >> > mentor's hand here! >> > >> > Here is a current list of contributes with number of commits they'v made: >> > == Initial committers, CLA ack >> > 865 Lee moon soo >> > 185 anthony corbacho >> > 130 Alexander Bezzubov >> > 29 Damien Corneau >> > 27 Kevin Kim >> > >> > == Non-CLA, No-SGA >> > 14 epahomov >> > 9 Corey Huang >> > 8 Mina Lee >> > 4 Akshat Aranya >> > 3 yundai >> > 3 Corey Huang >> > 1 kevindai0126 >> > 1 Young boom >> > 1 Vincent Botta >> > 1 Julien Buret >> > >> > If that's what is needed I can email everybody from the second group with >> > SGA submission request. >> > Should it be sent to secretary or does it make sense to tighten a >> feedback >> > loop and aggregate them and sent in a batch? >> > >> > AFAIK, after initial code dump is done we can address other issues like >> > adding headers, removing author tags, renaming packages, verifying that >> all >> > dependencies complies with Apache policy, etc in a regular way of >> preparing >> > a first apache release (creating JIRA issues for each of those activities >> > and so on) >> > >> > On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 12:52 PM, moon soo Lee <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > > Hi, >> > > >> > > I have curious about this right to the code base, too. >> > > What is difference between code from non-CLA contributor and one of our >> > > dependency that is Apache2 license? (when "by submitting a patch you >> > agree >> > > on Apache2 license" is effective) >> > > >> > > Also i think we need to check license of every dependencies we use in >> > java >> > > and javascript code. >> > > >> > > Best, >> > > moon >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > > Hi, >> > > > as Roman mentioned recently, >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > *"The biggest next step is to do transition thecode base from GH to >> our >> > > > newly minted Git >> > > > repo: >> > https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-zeppelin.git >> > > > <https://git-wip-us.apache.org/repos/asf?p=incubator-zeppelin.git >> >This >> > > > will >> > > > require an SGA from whoever has therights to the >> > > > codebase: https://www.apache.org/licenses/software-grant.txt >> > > > <https://www.apache.org/licenses/software-grant.txt>"* >> > > > Can anybody please help to clarify "whoever has the rights to the >> > > > codebase". >> > > > Does this only mean a copyright that intrinsically always belongs to >> a >> > > > code/content authors? Or something else? >> > > > Does it help if on contributing guide of initial Zeppelin there was a >> > > > notice like "by submitting a patch you agree on Apache2 license"? >> > > > So am I right, that we need to: >> > > > - hunt down every non-CLA contributor in master branch (as only it >> > will >> > > be >> > > > transferred to ASF repo) >> > > > - make them sign and send us SGA >> > > > - forward/save those somewhere (where?) >> > > > - VOTE on IP clearance >> > > > - only then we can actually "git push" to ASF repo >> > > > Is that all or am I missing something here? >> > > > -- >> > > > Kind regards, >> > > > Alexander >> > > >> > >>
