Re: Clarity needed -- adjusting the license headers

[Geertjan Wielenga]

Great, thanks.

Could you also take a look at the thread entitled "Assembling LICENSE and
NOTICE" -- i.e., we need a mentor's perspective here to make sure we're
taking the right approach.

Gj

On Mon, Sep 18, 2017 at 10:01 PM, Ate Douma  wrote:

> On 2017-09-16 21:32, Craig Russell wrote:
>
>> Hi Ate,
>>
>> On Sep 12, 2017, at 10:19 AM, Ate Douma  wrote:
>>>   1. If the source file is submitted with a copyright notice included in
>>> it, the
>>>  copyright owner (or owner's agent) must either:
>>>a. remove such notices, or
>>>b. move them to the NOTICE file associated with each applicable
>>> project
>>>   release, or
>>>c. provide written permission for the ASF to make such removal or
>>>   relocation of the notices.
>>>
>>> Now, in this case IMO the *SGA* (not the CCLA, which only applies for
>>> new/future
>>> code contributions) covers case c., e.g. provides the written permission
>>> for the
>>> ASF to remove/relocate the Oracle copyright notices.
>>>
>>
>> My understanding is that there is no distinction made between an
>> independent SGA and a CCLA with Schedule B. They both grant the same rights
>> to Apache.
>>
>
> Agreed, that also is my understanding.
>
> But the Oracle CCLA has no Schedule B, so their CCLA only applies to
> new/future
> contributions. And therefore I think only the SGA applies (and is needed)
> here.
>
> Ate
>
>
>
>> Craig
>>
>> Craig L Russell
>> Secretary, Apache Software Foundation
>> c...@apache.org http://db.apache.org/jdo
>>
>>
>

Re: Clarity needed -- adjusting the license headers

[Ate Douma]

On 2017-09-16 21:32, Craig Russell wrote:

Hi Ate,


On Sep 12, 2017, at 10:19 AM, Ate Douma  wrote:
  1. If the source file is submitted with a copyright notice included in it, the
 copyright owner (or owner's agent) must either:
   a. remove such notices, or
   b. move them to the NOTICE file associated with each applicable project
  release, or
   c. provide written permission for the ASF to make such removal or
  relocation of the notices.

Now, in this case IMO the *SGA* (not the CCLA, which only applies for new/future
code contributions) covers case c., e.g. provides the written permission for the
ASF to remove/relocate the Oracle copyright notices.


My understanding is that there is no distinction made between an independent 
SGA and a CCLA with Schedule B. They both grant the same rights to Apache.


Agreed, that also is my understanding.

But the Oracle CCLA has no Schedule B, so their CCLA only applies to new/future
contributions. And therefore I think only the SGA applies (and is needed) here.

Ate



Craig

Craig L Russell
Secretary, Apache Software Foundation
c...@apache.org http://db.apache.org/jdo

Re: Clarity needed -- adjusting the license headers

[Craig Russell]

Hi Ate,

> On Sep 12, 2017, at 10:19 AM, Ate Douma  wrote:
>  1. If the source file is submitted with a copyright notice included in it, 
> the
> copyright owner (or owner's agent) must either:
>   a. remove such notices, or
>   b. move them to the NOTICE file associated with each applicable project
>  release, or
>   c. provide written permission for the ASF to make such removal or
>  relocation of the notices.
> 
> Now, in this case IMO the *SGA* (not the CCLA, which only applies for 
> new/future
> code contributions) covers case c., e.g. provides the written permission for 
> the
> ASF to remove/relocate the Oracle copyright notices.

My understanding is that there is no distinction made between an independent 
SGA and a CCLA with Schedule B. They both grant the same rights to Apache.

Craig

Craig L Russell
Secretary, Apache Software Foundation
c...@apache.org http://db.apache.org/jdo

Re: Clarity needed -- adjusting the license headers

[Geertjan Wielenga]

Thanks a lot for the further clarification, Ate, much appreciated and
thanks for all the support thus far and also already in advance for the
coming period.

Gj

On Tue, Sep 12, 2017 at 7:19 PM, Ate Douma  wrote:

> On 2017-09-12 18:23, Greg Trasuk wrote:
>
>>
>> On Sep 12, 2017, at 12:10 PM, Geertjan Wielenga
>>>  wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi all,
>>>
>>> Just checking to make 100% sure -- "adjust the license headers -- Which
>>> this should be done by a Oracle representing committer, e.g. like what
>>> Jaroslav did for the -html4j repository."
>>>
>>> The above from the "NetBeans has landed in Apache Git" thread, the above
>>> specifically from Ate Douma, one of our mentors.
>>>
>>> So, just to verify this -- and to question the 'why' here, i.e.,
>>> NetBeans has been donated to Apache, the source code is now in Apache (with
>>> more coming). The question is why does specifically an Oracle representing
>>> committer need to do the license header adjustment?
>>>
>>> No problem, if true. But, is it true, and why is it true?
>>>
>>
>> I don’t think it is strictly the case.  As you say, Oracle has donated the
>> code under a CCLA, so Apache committers are free to change it.  I know
>> that
>> in Apache River’s incubation, we had non-Sun people change the license
>> headers on the code that Sun donated.
>>
>
> Right, I think you are correct.
>
> I'm sorry I've probably put you on the wrong foot with my earlier statement
> that "this should be done by a Oracle representing committer".
>
> I myself was put on the wrong foot by not correctly reading the policy on
> license headers [1], which states:
>
>   1. If the source file is submitted with a copyright notice included in
> it, the
>  copyright owner (or owner's agent) must either:
>a. remove such notices, or
>b. move them to the NOTICE file associated with each applicable
> project
>   release, or
>c. provide written permission for the ASF to make such removal or
>   relocation of the notices.
>
> Now, in this case IMO the *SGA* (not the CCLA, which only applies for
> new/future
> code contributions) covers case c., e.g. provides the written permission
> for the
> ASF to remove/relocate the Oracle copyright notices.
>
> So indeed, anyone of the Netbeans committers may do this, and so there is
> also
> no 'blocking state' on waiting for the 3 newly proposed Oracle committers
> to be
> voted in (see other thread).
>
> That all said, it might still be recommended to at least closely
> coordinate and
> verify the intended license header changes with someone from Oracle who
> also is
> familiar with the existing license/copyright headers to make sure the
> policy [1]
> is properly applied in case there some other/additional/non-standard
> (Oracle)
> headers to deal with.
> In case there are none of those, great, otherwise make sure to handle those
> correctly and if needed relocate non-standard headers to the NOTICE file.
>
> Again, sorry for the confusion and possible delay I caused with my earlier
> incorrect statement.
>
>
>> Don’t quote me on this, but I believe that Apache Rat (Creadur project)
>> has a
>> feature where it will alter license headers for you in the code that it
>> scans.  That might speed things up for you.
>>
>> One thing I’d suggest is to try to keep the commits and pulls focused - in
>> other words don’t bury a “fixed bug xyz” change in a merge that has 50
>> “trivial license header” edits.
>>
> That is a very important suggestion, see also again the Initial Code Import
> Guide [2] which strongly recommends to produce a clean and clear track
> record of
> the whole process.
>
> Thanks,
> Ate
>
> [1] http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html
> [2] https://incubator.apache.org/guides/transitioning_asf.html
>
>
>
>> Cheers,
>>
>> Greg Trasuk
>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Gj
>>>
>>
>>
>
>

Re: Clarity needed -- adjusting the license headers

[Greg Trasuk]

> On Sep 12, 2017, at 12:10 PM, Geertjan Wielenga 
>  wrote:
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> Just checking to make 100% sure -- "adjust the license headers -- Which
> this should be done by a Oracle representing committer, e.g. like what 
> Jaroslav
> did for the -html4j repository."
> 
> The above from the "NetBeans has landed in Apache Git" thread, the above
> specifically from Ate Douma, one of our mentors.
> 
> So, just to verify this -- and to question the 'why' here, i.e., NetBeans
> has been donated to Apache, the source code is now in Apache (with more
> coming). The question is why does specifically an Oracle representing
> committer need to do the license header adjustment?
> 
> No problem, if true. But, is it true, and why is it true?

I don’t think it is strictly the case.  As you say, Oracle has donated the code 
under a CCLA, so Apache committers are free to change it.  I know that in 
Apache River’s incubation, we had non-Sun people change the license headers on 
the code that Sun donated.

Don’t quote me on this, but I believe that Apache Rat (Creadur project) has a 
feature where it will alter license headers for you in the code that it scans.  
That might speed things up for you.

One thing I’d suggest is to try to keep the commits and pulls focused - in 
other words don’t bury a “fixed bug xyz” change in a merge that has 50 “trivial 
license header” edits.

Cheers,

Greg Trasuk
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Gj