Re: [DISCUSS] How to handle Ip-clearance for apache rocketmq community projects

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

BTW I took a look at that zip and it seems to contain a compiled version of the 
code. Does it contain all the source code need to generate that? The software 
grant should only include source code not any .exes or .dlls.

Thanks,
Justin

Re: [DISCUSS] How to handle Ip-clearance for apache rocketmq community projects

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

Here’a link to the IP process in a little more detail. [1]

Thanks,
Justin

http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/ip-clearance-template.html

Re: [DISCUSS] How to handle Ip-clearance for apache rocketmq community projects

[Justin Mclean]

Hi,

A couple of questions:
- Does the zip includes any 3rd party code or code based on 3rd party code? If 
so how was it licensed?
- What are the dependancies of the code?
- Have all contributors to the code signed a ICLA? Can we list them out?

I would expect the zip to be submitted as a software grant [1] and then send to 
the incubator for IP clearance. [2] [3] (But I'm also happy to check to see if 
anything is amiss in there).

Thanks,
Justin

1. https://www.apache.org/licenses/#grants
2. https://www.apache.org/licenses/#provenance
3, http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/

Re: [DISCUSS] How to handle Ip-clearance for apache rocketmq community projects

[yukon]

Hi,

Add vincentWangKB to the recipient list.

vincentWangKB announced the contribution of the rocketmq-cpp project in our
community lately[1], It's undoubtedly true that this project should pass
through the IP clearance.

Consider that our PMC has no experience to help outside project through the
IP clearance, I suggest let's start the process with this case, clear the
IP issues on the rocketmq-cpp project ASAP.

Hope we could resolve this issue before submitting next board report :)

[1].
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/7de2547f2eb29aede24d220628aad2ce8d1aaf8b21d118ec9b72bacd@%3Cdev.rocketmq.apache.org%3E
[2]. http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/

Regards,
yukon

On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 7:23 PM, vongosling  wrote:

> Sorry to miss the context. Repost again :-)
>
> Hi,
>
> As the topic said, I would like to put forward this issue despite we are
> apache tlp project. Firstly. we must arrange the total projects outside of
> Apache Repository[3]. According to my work on Apache RocketMQ Externals,
> CPP client[1] is a contribution from Alibaba, which is outside of Apache
> Repository. Could anyone add else? If no, I suggest we re-check what we
> have done about all external projects [2].
>
>
>
> [1] https://github.com/apache/rocketmq-externals/tree/master/rocketmq-cpp
> [2] https://github.com/apache/rocketmq-externals
> [3] http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/
>
>
> Best Regards,
> Von Gosling
>
>
> 2017-03-20 17:04 GMT+08:00 Von Gosling :
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > >  Perhaps like Justin
> > > said above, getting ICLAs from the contributors and having the
> potential
> > > committer discussion about each of them right away.
> >
> >
> >
> > Actually, i was also puzzled about this contribution behavior coming from
> > some Apache Project Community. I have been investing other Apache TLP
> works
> > about here. They get them involved in through the same git repository, or
> > leave them alone, just through one formal link to touch these community
> > projects. But as for us, we hope to merge the mature project to our
> > repository, let it under Apache RocketMQ’s umbrella. So, that’s why we
> > provided the Github group RocketMQ firstly, hoping to gathering them
> > together. We define the mature project as those were used in product
> > environment massively, like the RocketMQ-JMS and RocketMQ-Console
> projects
> > from the RocketMQ’s first marathon campaign :-)
> >
> >
> > > 在 2017年3月19日，01:26，Bruce Snyder  写道：
> > >
> > > Thanks for raising this question, Justin, as there is an important
> > > distinction here.
> > >
> > > Since the code that was not part of the core RocketMQ and was recently
> > > moved to the externals project was not migrated as part of the original
> > > move from Github to the ASF, it must be treated a bit differently. This
> > is
> > > especially true if folks who are not currently committers to the ASF
> > > RocketMQ project contributed to that code. We should have taken a more
> > > formal approach to moving over this code (my mistake for not
> recognizing
> > > this sooner). In terms of voting in the folks who contributed to this
> > code
> > > when it resided at Github vs. now that it resides at the ASF, there
> must
> > be
> > > a formal discussion of this amongst the PPMC about these potential
> > > committers in order to make this decision just like any other potential
> > > committers.
> > >
> > > It's also important to recognize that the ASF cannot provide the same
> > legal
> > > guarantees for code that was not officially contributed to the ASF vs.
> > code
> > > that goes through the proper legal process that has been established
> over
> > > the years at the ASF (like the original core RocketMQ code went
> through).
> > > This what code grants are all about and an important tenant of why the
> > ASF
> > > exists. I'm honestly not quite sure what to do here. Perhaps like
> Justin
> > > said above, getting ICLAs from the contributors and having the
> potential
> > > committer discussion about each of them right away.
> > >
> > > Justin, what are your further thoughts on this second topic?
> > >
> > > Bruce
> > >
> > > On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 8:43 PM, Justin Mclean <
> jus...@classsoftware.com
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >>> And we want to adopt the same way in the second code marathon:
> > >>> 1. Launch and develop the sub project in [1] at the initial stage.
> > >>> 2. Migrate the stable and fully functional sub projects to
> > >>> rocketmq-externals, meanwhile vote the top contributors as a
> committer.
> > >>>
> > >>> Does it ok ?
> > >>
> > >> I think I have a couple of issues with this:
> > >> 1. Code that hasn’t been reviewed for possible IP or legal issues is
> > >> copied into the Apache repo.
> > >> 2. We may not have ICLAs for the contributors.
> > >> 3. You are voting on committer based on their contribution to an
> > external
> > >> project not this Apache project.
> >