The move has been approved by the CNCF governing board, I will move on with making Windows Exporter an official exporter.
On 06 Mar 12:05, Julien Pivotto wrote: > I wanted to give you an update on my previous email regarding the > licensing requirements for the Windows Exporter project. I have opened a > license exception request with the CNCF, which can be found at the > following link: > > https://github.com/cncf/foundation/issues/514 > > I will keep you all updated on any developments with this request. > > On 22 Dec 09:33, Stuart Clark wrote: > > On 2022-12-22 09:09, Ben Kochie wrote: > > > It was my understanding that license changes, can be done by the > > > copyright holder, without consent of all contributors. Because they do > > > not hold any copyright to the code. IIRC this is how Grafana was able > > > to relicense from Apache to AGPL. They did not need to get consent > > > from all contributors. > > > > > > Of course, old versions are subject to the old license, but moving > > > from prometheus-community to prometheus would effectively be a fork. > > > > > > In this case we could do it with permission from the original author > > > as stated in the LICENSE file. > > > > > > > You are correct in saying that it is the copyright owner(s) who have to > > agree to any license changes. > > > > However by default if you contribute something to a project you are now one > > of the copyright owners (only to your contributed code, not the whole > > thing). The original owner is nothing special (other than possibly being the > > largest owner, because there might be more of their code than anyone else). > > > > The only way around this (which I assume Grafana did, and other projects > > require) is when contributing you sign a copyright transfer agreement - that > > way legally the person/organisation the contributors transferred ownership > > to is the only owner, and they have the right to do anything they wanted > > (including using the code commercially or making everything closed source). > > > > So if this happened, and there is a record of signed copyright transfers the > > license could be changed just by the agreement of the one owner. Presumably > > however that isn't the case, and therefore it isn't possible. > > > > Another option which has been used in other projects (such as the Linux > > kernel for code that was found to not be correctly licensed [contributed by > > someone who didn't have the rights to do so]) is to remove that code & > > rewrite it (although you have to be careful that is is done 'cleanly' to > > stop claims that you just copied that bad code). At that point the > > contributor's code is no more, so no permission is then needed. If 95% of > > existing contributors agreed to relicense and/or assign copyright but there > > was 5% who didn't agree or couldn't be contacted that would potentially be > > an option - of course it could be very difficult/impossible if the remaining > > code was something really core. > > > > -- > > Stuart Clark > > > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "Prometheus Developers" group. > > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > > email to prometheus-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > > To view this discussion on the web visit > > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/prometheus-developers/ecc14b37981ae722f6b7ca74203c67b9%40Jahingo.com. > > -- > Julien Pivotto > @roidelapluie -- Julien Pivotto @roidelapluie -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Prometheus Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to prometheus-developers+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/prometheus-developers/ZJ06UTRQbXt68fvx%40nixos.
