Re: Challenges using Gitbox
On 04/16/2018 07:37 PM, Ralph Goers wrote: > IMO, it is inappropriate to add project managers to a project as a committer > just because they are employed by a company that has committers who are paid > to work on the project. There are some companies who have a person whose sole duty is manage the employees that work on a specific open source project. As such, open source projects have two options: * grant the employee position the access needed to manage the project, so that everybody can see what is going on; * deny the employ position the needed access, and be surprised by what the company contributes. In most instances, the surprises are things that were neither anticipated, nor considered needed by the non-employee contributors; How fast could an individual expect to be given the authority to do this type of project management, without contributing a line of code? Ralph wrote: > Companies do not do the prioritization, planning, road-mapping, shaping product-design, etc of ASF projects. The committers and PMC members do that. Most of the companies that have a person whose sole duty is to manage employees that work on a specific open source project, will ignore upstream requests, if they don't have access to do management things there. This will result in undesirable surprises. If the company PM does have access at the Open Source Project level, then the input from the other contributors will be taken into consideration. Yes, there is a very fine line to walk, between allowing a company position authority to do "x", and preventing the company from taking over the project. > They can use their own Jira repo for that kind of stuff. Do you really want to see a build of, say, Apache OpenOffice, with complete L10N (Help documentation, UI, grammar checking, spell checking for both ancient, medieval, and modern forms of the official language(s), and writing system(s), etc.) for say, Crimea, North Korea, or Syria, with no prior notice, much less discussion. I have a pretty good idea of what ASF-Legal will say about that specific scenario. Sure the company can just fork the project. It has happened before, and it will happen again. But setting up conditions where forking is the only option for a community based project is, IMNSHO, non-viable. > such people can earn merit by becoming involved with the community and helping out where they can. In theory, that sounds good, but as a practical matter, how many people that have ever been on the ASF board of directors neither know/knew, nor use(d) any programming languages in getting there? IOW, they got there exclusively on their ability to write documentation, do community relations, or utilize other non-coding skills? jonathon - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Challenges using Gitbox
On 04/11/2018 06:11 PM, Maxime Beauchemin wrote: > 3. The mailing list is a bit dated. I'm saying "a bit" here as an attempt ... > searchable. Something like Google Groups would be a huge step forward here. I'd suggest Groups.IO over Google Groups, if only because one of its features is: "Integration with other services, including: Github, Google Hangouts, Dropbox, Instagram, Facebook Pages, and the ability to import Feeds into your groups." Downside # 1 is that Apache would have to go with either the Premium or Enterprise option, at US$110/year or US$2200/year, respectively. Furthermore, I'm not sure the 1TB storage space would suffice. Downside # 2 is GDPR. Groups.IO is hoping that it won't apply to them. I can see the EU commission going after both ASF and Groups.IO, if it isn't in full compliance with GDPR. OTOH, how compliant with GDPR are any of the ASF projects? jonathon - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Thoughts on Trademarks / Existing Domains on Podling Proposals / Reports
On 02/12/2018 11:24 PM, Dave Fisher wrote: > (1) PODLINGNAMESEARCH may not be needed. Sometime in 1995/1996 time frame, "Seattle Storm Woman's Basketball" was granted a registered trademark. In 1996, The Seattle Storm Woman's Basketball team had a losing season. In 1997, The Seattle Storm Woman's Basketball team had a losing season. In 1998, The Seattle Storm Woman's Basketball team had a losing season. In 1999, The Seattle Storm Woman's Basketball team had a losing season. Nonetheless, in 1999, the NFL announced the formation of the Seattle Storm Woman's Basketball team. Adding insult to injury, the NFL also obtained a registered trademark for the phrase "Seattle Storm Woman's Basketball". Two registered trademarks of the same phrase, to be used by teams that played the same sport, in the same city, during the same calender year, and of the same gender. The justice system in the United States depends upon who has the most money, so The Seattle Storm Woman's Basketball team lost their court case against the NFL. Situations like that are why PODLINGNAMESEARCH always needs to be done, preferably by at least two different groups. jonathon - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [VOTE] Retire the Climate Model Data Analyzer Podling
On 2 February 2017 4:20:43 pm PST, "John D. Amen wrote: > I am calling a vote to retire them. Does retirement mean that source code is no longer available? One description that I read implied that it was deleted, whilst a set on instructions implied that it was retained. > It was confirmed that development activities happed outside the ASG. That doesn't surprise me. jonathon -- Multilingual ODF Support - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Documentation
On 12/11/2016 04:09, Gunnar Tapper wrote: > For documentation, I couldn't find an easy way to do multi-chapter books, If AOo is meant, use Master Documents. There are a couple of use cases (^1 ), where Master Documents don't work. In those instances, virtually every solution will fail. (^2) > but I also have people that prefer to review/read documents on Kindle-style > devices. PDF helps with that. Most eBook readers, and smart phones do not handle PDFs very well. For those, either ePub or Mobi work much better. > But overall, my main motivation is to get others to write: Writing good documentation is a long, arduous process. It involves explaining the various options, including when and how to use them. Options that the individual writing the documentation might not be aware of. Taking a trivial example: * Export PDF; * Export as PDF; * Print (to PDF); * Print (as PDF); * Send Email as PDF; Five options, each of which creates a slightly different PDF. Easy to explain, with blatantly obvious differences. For a slightly harder example to explain, look at ligatures in English, using the Latin Writing System. Yes, it works, but the results are much better when both CTL and Asian text support is turned on. For something that is not only not obvious, but incredibly difficult to track down, the presence or absence of metadata in the fonts that are used, affects whether or not AOo utilizes the font correctly. (That you paid US$10,000 for the typeface, does not mean that the metadata is either present, or accurate. Nor does the fact that the typeface was gratis, mean that the metadata is either absent, or inaccurate.) > make it easy to do the right thing. This is where a defined work flow process is vital. For various reasons, the workflow used back when Sun was running OOo, weren't acceptable here (Apache Foundation running AOo). So what happens is that would-be documentation creators sink, due to a lack of either clear guidelines, or a pre-defined workflow process. ^1: The most commonly encountered such use case, is when different audiences have to get different content, but that content differs by anything between a word, to three or four paragraphs. ^2: For the most commonly encountered use case, LeanPub offers the only easy to implement solution that works. The issue with that solution, is that one's content is no longer confidential, which is the usual reason for having slightly different content for different audiences. jonathon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [DISCUSS] Documentation
On 11/11/2016 07:46, Gunnar Tapper wrote: > there's a clear preference to use Apache OpenOffice for documentation. The driving force behind that was Sun's insistence that their own dog food be eaten. > Beyond usability (and therefore more willingness to document), it also makes > translation easier. * Both _Anaphraseus_ (http://extensions.openoffice.org/en/project/anaphraseus) and _Translation Tools_ (http://extensions.openoffice.org/en/project/translation-table) have been used by documentation writers that want to stay entirely within the AOo/OOo environment. > Has anyone used OpenOffice for documentation before? ODF Authors, for one. http://www.odfauthors.org/ I'm aware of several other FLOSS & Freemium projects that use it. > If so, how is it handled with source control etc? Option # 1: OOoSVN, which is both unmaintained and buggy, utilizes SVN for version control. ^1 ( http://extensions.openoffice.org/en/project/ooosvn ) Option # 2: With every save, make a backup copy, and rely on cron to rename and sweep the backups, into an archival folder. Option # 3: Periodically make a specific save into an archive/backup folder. My guess is that most outfits that use AOo for documentation, use option # 3. ^1: Considering that both SVN and AOo are Apache Projects, I'm a little surprised that this extension is both unmaintained, and buggy. jonathon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [DISCUSS] Olympian Incubation Proposal
On 29/09/2016 04:01, Henry Saputra wrote: > The project will be forked off the existing Titan code base. That is a red flag. jonathon - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
RE: Preliminary NetBeans cost findings
Greg wrote: >Second big example is SourceForge.net hosting the AOO binaries. If you are going to cite AOo as an example, then http://templates.services.openoffice.org/ provides an example of how easily things spin out of control, when third parties take primary responsibility for distribution of artefacts related to an Apache Software Project. jonathon - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Apache NetBeans Incubator Proposal
On 22/09/2016 05:18, Roman Shaposhnik wrote: > had a non-trivial amount of commits to then Sun NetBeans between 2002-2008. > He then drifted away from the > project but would be interested, potentially, re-engaging. Is it possible to create a "master list' of everybody who has contributed, when they contributed, and roughly how much they contributed? If so, then: * send everybody on that list an ICLA to fill out and return; * Include that list as an appendix to the Incubation Paperwork. Call it _Individuals who, on request will be considered to be part of the Initial Committer List_, once the appropriate paperwork has been signed and submitted; * The _Initial Committer List_ consists of people who have signed and submitted the appropriate paperwork, and requested to be on the list; jonathon - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Joshua Incubator Proposal - Machine Translation Toolkit
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 20/01/2016 11:18, Henri Yandell wrote: > 'TM'? Translation Memory. jonathon -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJWn8SIAAoJEKG7hs8nSMR7h8EP/01XxxF896gbhRJBhlv5ng0J GxWcFpUYD3yyXp3c1CjmSI5rmLaoDja+ezRwQ/4iuZ+3T39FxSuijBD6oqZi0+gM 3b9E3OXYqpToi2FS2uW2LajEGLhU+H3JSPqmABH3qFye/MOjeiSqoAD/yg150KLp oHxUH3Sd69BGAVvGgobOpZt/5xm09rKZcVowGH6HMlRtUOHzzLeVr5rG/6KvGEEZ hkbdDOdpz9/njVhDZWrxEGsvItSCAN29LFM8sdpusCx4X0ewYp7P5M4bgvJVfttX WWY+Arn5dGHj7kjBtE5tZXUZVV0tgavTrhuzLCdMMh16wUygfHwypNX0rsP2dM59 +tTB0SxxXdSEDGgIaCw+p3EvO8jNeFPr2Yx0hUTWPsbmipP/CNoo7WtG63426x7W ehUQECBThrRajC7ifRl3ZWtOKTwjpNdwzzhOLI3K346/9VcreNsQrT5HcRP5y3/n /SEyV5FvrPQOErgA+0K+heSs0RFDRiCfMzdwFfBmgzGjzwWzMeFwqvCYnSCR6VKp UvbEZJxDaCz3yIukR25RN3H9JdjfyqpOc1rxD9anOJw2cnbDzNwv8pyn/RWRfCct BM5RAvKqnVNoQqwCjvWdpfVxF4+BoLyrcAE+t8yKsY1j1tGc9F6b/kzkXai60omf KrGAFX69koM/BCfirdQv =Sjo6 -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: [DISCUSS] Apache Joshua Incubator Proposal - Machine Translation Toolkit
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 20/01/2016 03:38, Henri Yandell wrote: > License-wise, any expectation of problems from the GPL and LGPL depend encies? I'd also recommend closely examining the license for any TM libraries that ship with the program, with a focus on the providence of the libra ry. Whilst it has been several years since I've used a TM library, when I did, the licenses were, under Debian Guidelines, non-free. Back then, I didn't look at licenses, to see if they complied with Apache Guidelines. About fifteen years ago, I was on the fringes of a lawsuit involving a TM library. All intellectual property rights of the TM Library belonged to the developers of the software program, even though the words in the TM Library were either deliberately selected by the licensed user of the software program, or came from parsing content that was created, and to whom all intellectual property rights apparently were owned, by the user of the software program. jonathon -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJWnx5QAAoJEKG7hs8nSMR7YM8QAIVT3FdUncmBryIsd4fFUwDV nUwinxGfFON6PGdyfOPmZsl2CRz8c+sJxrCVxJePj0PbwCLTfIy+HHNro3lpAefC iHLBHdWyFOBtlkxac+QigRG7tuKw9xRd5lo7Y5A3cNx/C1nL0c4GULDZCaZtDnQi yf5bUdmyU57KYeMbg4hTePeYkiOYt1Bez37V00hj57AAuo3JZWCzGv/rFcgFZ0r5 nGaQrSll7N8UJ68HurBPReRdxhnVYv5jTTgI0sCoJfBaIH7DZga6Mur87LGbvjUW 3xomBzpHuMGpZBnuNBMyyMOFpZlu41zmLHeAWL/L27fOkKcfuVcDeZsXlg/jOULg P/iqxuVQqpmMThpSUVDBcsBF/VjgHTGCFz7buv/4GKhNtbTohldMX6oTBaIfgPOg QIEM9k4LYLbl4jLBP/I3fESAte+pW1bFglMEj+YfoUTBMYQsvclMqSwi/oYA5xS2 IbmQtqxXG26Dm/a8fb5eRJ3fp4lGkXWHmq/vdrkNLtYgQ5kwGTilQpiWjowJnLVm ODlTvgS44JMFeMw2cAzVUjdpH9IZT89Glo6iL3J7ncfnaIZSwozQRCbLStf1jY/u CznX492Lywdw2dm+QcpEpq7dm5ewm0AORFumodvn+P+cYqLigsjNOz0yO/RCaBOg pkYvV6RHni2vFqn44uRq =88z1 -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Milagro trademark
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 15/01/2016 23:24, Nick Kew wrote: > Would it make sense to append the trademark assignment to a forthcomin g software grant? My recommendation would be to do the trademark assignment as one grant, and the software assignment as a second grant. My rational is that the trademark assignment gets filed with USPTO. Maek things simple for the USPTO, and only list the items that they (USPTO) maintain in their trademark database. I am not a lawyer. It should be obvious that this is not legal advice. jonathon -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJWmaPEAAoJEKG7hs8nSMR7u9gP/23YHikoQUbrUTsIUd2Q/nx/ d974osVhaNe6L6MpJkExHXwn0jrawb9wzYFx+qvBL65LGPuHxI+EknEs0m2zsTxg Ymrq34zTZcH7oiTKPcoDp63u+8a1lbTPgg7SmjrRvsSYSb+aiKYgN8fd3mc8VhEm L4cZNLyZThxK5F5HSDa+Js6yl3lFTPI+3md0r/7N6xWpmfycUhvwuPlpv4agjMmf ZJ0jjWq1zb2Ev0EYGhjqEFSwbpw8UuWKTtPoEg7mCu4eY25MY9tOB8RPyhR0iS3w T1+ryYngU5SkZj7NdFG04ePURUzy/UHYwnRLver4fRqrGXSJ29TCowfl9Kxf/2EO ElNzBrKnKTQDcIxDTl4znHxd1VWqc8Vlx/8MQ94avv2NuLvI5Mrjw/INNSGqYCFJ CUS7XxSCg4QM+RWq+bXxW+efpb3KwrJ/x6/DDYuaS0u70DZK6HVCUtP2yywFMC5H UMbJdKjBPTfl40WcGNuxPmyaBAN0GRc4HCplpQsSCGsmYkJR/lT2g3zi2cjaGeFE Pf9kY359FzOyoZhkOrJP3SooPsRdfeFs+Pms6T+hkKshEzC37oOZbmYedQMSw/B5 ZfQiDyyM4QYsD68xooYXDeD/Xk5mp9GbxbmWleQJD7SCwHKuMDBLRsZuHae+d0fM gBZGwbdNkEsqi83ofOGa =kPKa -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Apache Metrics, Not Apache Humans
On 15/11/2015 18:20, Marko Rodriguez wrote: > 1. There is no need to have philosophical arguments (not grounded in > measurables) about what rules a project should follow (bounded by law). "Healthy" is intrinsically subjective, and as such, unmeasurable, leading to even more debates as to whether or not a project is "healthy". > Apache becomes a breeding ground for different models of open source (bounded > by law), not just "The Apache Way." "The Apache Way" was formulated for a reason, and not only because it more or less works as designed. Other models of open source have different points of failure, some of them being the equivalent of sepiku on sight. > The Apache Way should be about metrics, The major problem with measuring things, is that the only things that get done, are those that get measured. This is most clearly seen in the bankruptcy of ISO-9000 certified organizations, that won awards for their quality control, and measurement in changes thereof. (In some fields of endeavour, ISO-9000 certification is the first step towards an inevitable chapter 7 bankruptcy filing.) > not about philosophy as different paths lead to the same mountain top Somebody failed Buddhist Logic 101. (Not all paths lead to the same mountain top, even if they appear to start at the base of the same mountain.) > P.S. The same should hold true for educational degrees. I graduate and now > forever I'm an expert in computers? That depends upon whether you went to a vocational/trade school, or an institutional that gave you a real education. (Hint: if you didn't learn the YiJing,TRIZ, and at least seven languages, alongside the seven arts, you didn't have an education.) jonathon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: ODF Toolkit may need help
On 03/09/15 01:51, Ian C wrote: > I'm not sure on the numbers or the details. It would be a shame to alienate > them. The earliest mention of going to the attic on the ODF-Toolkit Users list was on 21 January 2014. http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-odf-users/201401.mbox/%3ccap-ksoj3yl_-qw_vcucm7uexduz0-_vg24muvhx7qrbqxm6...@mail.gmail.com%3E On the ODF-Toolkit developer list, the earliest discussion about the future of the project I can find, started with the message at http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-odf-dev/201312.mbox/%3CCAP-ksoh3FMYrVis7bHSVKOtH0=j8k7a32zxww-nuutvjcf9...@mail.gmail.com%3E. Consequently, I doubt that going to attic will alienate anybody. Some projects don't make it to graduation. (How positive this is, depends upon both the percentage of projects that go to attic, rather than graduation, as well as an analysis of all projects that went from incubation to attic. If more than a third of the projects go to attic, and are _not_ "me too" projects, then, overall, the Apache Software Foundation is healthy. If less than 5% of the projects go to attic, and are _not_ "me too" projects, then ASF is stagnant, unhealthy, and failing in its mission.) jonathon - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: ODF Toolkit may need help
On 02/09/15 10:25, John D. Ament wrote: > I'd like to bring to your attention the ODF Toolkit podling. This project has been torn between going to the attic, or becoming a sub-project of another project, since at least January 2014. IMNSHO, it should go to the attic, with Apache Corinthia picking up whatever code ODF Toolkit created that it (Corinthia) can use. jonathon - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: Reform of Incubator {was; [DISCUSSION] Graduate Ignite from the Apache Incubator)
On 07/26/2015 04:35 PM, jan i wrote: unless we don't trust the mentors It isn't a case of not trusting the mentors, but rather, the ease with which something can be accidentally overlooked. Rephrased. The mentor is too close to the project, to see all of the errors in the project. jonathon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: I still don't see your priorities
On 07/04/2015 04:53 PM, Stefan Reich wrote: How about taking something good that WANTS TO EXIST, and supporting that? I didn't know that software was sentient. If you meant software that somebody wants to exist, I can point you to thousands of projects that got no further than a name, a proposal, and space on either code.google.com or SourceForge. If you'd like Apache to support whatever project you think it should support, then you need to propose that the project to the Apache Incubator. That means drawing up a formal proposal, explaining what the project is about, how/why Apache is a good fit for the project, what it brings to Apache, and where Apache will be beneficial to it. Some projects won't ever be a good fit with the Apache Way, and hence won't make it into the incubator. Other projects might make an extremely good fit with the Apache Way, but, due to the unlikelihood of them graduating from the incubator, are not accepted. Still other projects are a good fit with the Apache Way, and seemingly graduate from incubation as soon as they are accepted into the incubator. I will grant that there are exceptions to those. Projects that were accepted, with the advance knowledge that they would go straight to the attic, never passing graduation. Projects that were accepted, that were not a good fit, and had unfavorable odds of ever fitting in with The Apache way. But these are exceptions --- rare instances of risk-taking, in the hopes that the outcome would be the unexpected, rather than the expected. In the majority of these exceptions, there is something in the proposal that implied that there was a better than even chance of the dooming factors being overcome. One factor that is huge, but almost completely ignored by outsiders, is the impression that the proposer makes on the community. This is not about faking, or authentically expressing The Apache Way, but rather, about delivering what is proposed. jonathon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Serveral legal question about donating project to Apache?
On 06/18/2015 04:34 PM, Stefan Reich wrote: You're not a lawyer, but you let software development be controlled by lawyers? Failing to follow the advice of lawyers can have extremely expensive, and even more unpleasant consequences. The procedures setup by the Apache Software Foundation are to prevent: * Claims of copyright infringement; * Claims of trademark infringement; * Claims of service mark infringement; * Claims of patent infringement; The cost of successfully defending a patent infringement lawsuit is ten million dollars. The cost of successfully defending copyright, trademark, and service mark lawsuits is roughly five million dollars. Whilst the procedures and steps setup by ASF won't prevent lawsuits, they do: * establish the providence of each line of code in each program; * the providence under which the ASF project can use a service mark, or trademark; * the legal right of a project to utilize a specific something that has been patented; If a legal dispute about something erupts, ASF's legal counsel can go to the source, showing the chain of evidence supporting the legal right of the project, to use whatever is being used, that the other party is claiming they can not use. Whilst that doesn't help against parties that are unreasonable, it does mean that the odds of ASF prevailing in a lawsuit are extremely high. Nonetheless, even prevailing means a loss. There are few, if any steps that can be taken, to minimize the risk of an unreasonable party filing a frivolous lawsuit that is extremely expensive to fight. jonathon * English - detected * English * English javascript:void(0); # signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: You know what... Apache is just too complicated.
On 18/05/2015 18:35, Stefan Reich wrote: All you'd have to do is connect programmers to projects. Simple. Why all the rules? Risk Avoidance. The rules are designed to protect both the programmers, and the projects. They define/describe what is expected of each party, their rights, and their duties. These are things that make things run much more smoothly, than would otherwise be the case. Sometimes, the Apache rules are arcane, but that is necessary to describe edge cases, and more definitively include/exclude those specific datapoints. jonathon signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: Is a Software Grant Agreement always needed for IP Clearance?
On 4/5/2014 8:08 AM, Rob Vesse wrote: entirely by myself though obviously Cray holds the copyright. That little datapoint is not obvious at all. Whether or not that is the case depends upon the specific wording of your contract with Cray, your legal jurisdiction, Cray's legal jurisdiction, which statutes reflecting copyright and employment issues take precedence, and how case law, if applicable, affects those statutes, contracts, etc. In this scenario is a SGA actually needed to carry out IP Clearance of the contributed code or are the existing ICLA and CCLA sufficient? I'd suggest what is arguably the most conservative position possible. Show a clear chain of evidence showing who the legal copyright owner of the contributed code is. File an SGA for the IP Clearance of the contributed code. Treat both the ICLA and CCLA as after-the-fact supplemental permissions. I am not a lawyer. This is not legal advice. jonathon - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 06/06/2011 08:02, Robert Burrell Donkin wrote: AIUI the TDF uses the LGPL. Like the Apache License (AL), the LGPL also allows proprietary software to be built on top. So, why would you break your rule for a TDF project but not an ASF one? It is much easier to convert Apache licensed code to closed source, proprietary software, than it is to convert LGPL licensed code to closed source, proprietary software. Given the history of OOo, instead of 100 commercial vendors of the product, pointing to OOo for support, but not providing source code, and not telling anybody what code changes were made, under the Apache License you'll have 1,000 such vendors. ### Did anybody bother telling The Apache Foundation people during the negotiations that the OOo community is listed as the _official_ support site for at least a dozen commercially distributed versions. Vendors that didn't bother to inform the OOo community of that status. Vendors that didn't bother tell their paying customers that the paid support was volunteers from OOo community that wouldn't be able to address all of their problems/issues? jonathon - -- If Bing copied Google, there wouldn't be anything new worth requesting. If Bing did not copy Google, there wouldn't be anything relevant worth requesting. DaveJakeman 20110207 Groklaw. * English - detected * English * English javascript:void(0); # -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJN7KsTAAoJEERA7YuLpVrVAeIIAIv0moR09nNk73L4/63yS0R2 QOarxEylxY/HURogEnAr6t7KmBzq6FzKSbZoLVApgbHOVUuUGe1KWf5z9+Xm/9bT C3HZd18RJ/Ea+cGjwRa23kkd+GKUKF8w/dOiT/2UL2BdtejPz8lp237CsCAeVqIK 5LawJP7BeA0xNJTURFOkRDaQ9mIPNyRZ++od9meiO18XrvgQBC5PC7Jt1b3yiud7 KrvMFBWHxifScerHSOuOoBbzTAGorz0v8E2oyaO91Whoxow4YgweD6WY3nu5KlBm u/CfVXBXKvLakPqCmfOLoU78vYMMggXL3yBMOgE4tV/hmy1+YGpAey26ck0FVBg= =lKMU -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal: Splitting the Community?
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 03/06/2011 19:22, Sam Ruby wrote: Note: I did not read it that way (I think it is quite plausible and I read it as a bona fide attempt by IBM to shove the project down the throat of The Apache Foundation. I hope we don't need to deliberate for a full month, but I do agree Make that a minimum of ninety days. (I realize that that is more than nine times the average stay in incubator status.) Of course, if you guys want to be really blind sided by things that you should have known before voting. jonathon - -- If Bing copied Google, there wouldn't be anything new worth requesting. If Bing did not copy Google, there wouldn't be anything relevant worth requesting. DaveJakeman 20110207 Groklaw. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJN7LO2AAoJEERA7YuLpVrV0OcIAM4SbwT2d0Lqr5pJqEAx2QvB +fUsKOx4IryskMcYAMlmhb98a+Dl/jvDsOarTAYLmvg5bpFGrO0QDM/hm8raNIkT OeKmFgvt3WGT1rQuuzqyG77++up+A55qMBBgUAaTTjQEWraXa4VK2Se8SuTURJzE Hc2H061epYidnF4QhQVakwf/3rtMPh5rD1Ut8hQPYLsndIbMe7xlzPoHkIxgYz37 /hxqPRZ+BSuynj9joiUJD4JxRIpNLmqfBeq1L6BF7F9Y4HEABvRhCijpEDstDbXS HQ4SL2cQxfQX3NIgACNa7lT4beBz0QwcZ4MgtL2gZPVnlu2D1O7G+Gg0/LmQoks= =Iam7 -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
Re: OpenOffice.org Apache Incubator Proposal
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On 06/06/2011 13:58, Joe Schaefer wrote: Because Apache will own the brand, we can make access to the brand contingent on things like non-abuse of our OOo forums, among other things. ROTFLMAO At best, you are incredibly naive. Those policies will stop the companies for all of one picosecond, if that long. I've a feeling The Apache Foundation has never had to test their trademark policy with organizations whose modus operandi is to ignore the law. Organizations whose legal status is, at best, shaky. Invariably with a domicile outside of the United States. If the Apache Foundation doesn't have a formal policy on dealing with victims of swindlers, formulating that policy now would be a very good idea. Something that the legal team can mull through, before the first victim of an Apache OpenOffice swindle posts a support question to a list, forum, or other point of contact. A policy that won't result in The Apache Foundation having to defend itself in a frivolous lawsuit, because the victim paid for support provided by a venue run by The Apache Foundation. jonathon - -- If Bing copied Google, there wouldn't be anything new worth requesting. If Bing did not copy Google, there wouldn't be anything relevant worth requesting. DaveJakeman 20110207 Groklaw. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.11 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJN7PT0AAoJEERA7YuLpVrVHX8IAIXsqi5+Siea9XWtap58CjWM z1tfFeEAHGlY9ChamXkshcOh0P4/E/fYZPhiASggatvN2DsQGwWQloX0CqlKou+A 9f6kEOOrgZd9SSC4pSZRQ705apWl9p7c04IjucaY9WTYT6kHsNBEkv++4Q8f4QQL PWvtBzohYNdGLtTvuxmgT160IBxA2+VoHKnXwztAthTssuz0fq9gX/ZZWWQOFm2G 6v6+rsvzXDFH9bAnwf9prWD4J+psFrjAX15U6KrcCBLJ12wahq5ZwmTSs1/pTt+q fRiVIdrRGg9OuFFATbbz63TUrin0ttuSBjyP1V8RlnbQcEM1mSjYlXmHmFoQ0oQ= =Vaee -END PGP SIGNATURE- - To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
