Thanks, Craig. Very much appreciated! -jakob
On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 4:41 PM, Jake Farrell <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks Craig > Will link this thread in the INFRA ticket and start the import > > -Jake > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 5:29 PM, Craig L Russell > <[email protected]>wrote: > > > On Mar 12, 2014, at 1:47 PM, David Nalley wrote: > > > > > On Wed, Mar 12, 2014 at 4:24 PM, Jakob Homan <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >> Right, which is what I was working on. This thread is to find out if, > > >> given what that original grantor considers this new repo part of the > > >> original grant, we need to go through with the extra work of the IP > > >> Clearance. > > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > > Multiple issues here. The repo in question wasn't called out in the > > > proposal that was voted on when Samza was accepted as a podling. > > > Though for the record, neither was the initial repo. Regardless, that > > > was almost a year ago. IMO IP Clearance is the process that covers > > > bringing in the additional IP at this time. You'll need to follow that > > > process, and CCLA might give you some of the paperwork you need in the > > > process, but it doesn't obviate the need for going through the IP > > > Clearance process. > > > > > > My reading of things is that as part of that IP Clearance you would > > > need one of: > > > * a valid CCLA with the contribution described in Schedule B (We > > > really don't have an idea of what, if anything was in Schedule B) > > > > I don't think there is any confidentiality of the following information. > > > > The original CCLA from LinkedIn has this: > > > > <verbatim>Schedule B > > Samza: a system for processing stream data from publish-subscribe systems > > such as Apache Kafka. The developer writes a stream processing task, and > > executes it as a Samza job. Samza then routes messages between stream > > processing tasks and the publish-subscribe systems that the messages are > > addressed to. > > </verbatim> > > > > LinkedIn's legal department comments are sufficient for me to clear this > > donation: > > > > LI counsel on open source matters: "Hello-samza is ancillary to Samza and > > thus fits within a broadly interpreted Exhibit B to the original Samza > > CCLA. In other words, it's already covered, with no legal need for a new > > CCLA. Also worth noting that we're the donor of both Samza and > > hello-samza, so a key problem that would be resolved by having the > > separate, new CCLA (i.e. substantial donation of code by a different > > company) is actually a problem we do not have." > > > > > > Craig > > > > > > > * A valid CCLA in conjunction with ICLAs along with attestation that > > > it's a work held by $dayjob and you are transferring it to the ASF. > > > * A valid SGA for the IP > > > > > > --David > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > > > > Craig L Russell > > Secretary, Apache Software Foundation > > [email protected] http://db.apache.org/jdo > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
