Yes, NFLabs is a legal entity incorporated in South Korea, here is CTO on the list. And so far we assumed the same - that NFLabs retained copyright on the entire codebase until now.
So is there something else we can do to help with subj? (like tracking down individual contributors and asking for SGA or submitting Corporate CLA) On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 9:49 AM, moon soo Lee <[email protected]> wrote: > I am a cto and one of the board members of NFLabs Inc. > I think i can help legal issues related NFLabs Inc for codebase transition. > > Best, > moon > > 2015년 1월 7일 수요일, Roman Shaposhnik<[email protected]>님이 작성한 메시지: > > > 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] <javascript:;>> 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] > > <javascript:;>> 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] > <javascript:;>> > > 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] > > <javascript:;>> 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 > > >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > -- -- Kind regards, Alexander.
