Podling commons-rdf fits that description. It started at GitHub in the
knowledge that ASF was a possible route; ALv2 from the start. (We
started at GH because there are people who would join discussions more
freely on GH.)
It so happens, the contributors are all ASF committers. With advice
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 9:35 AM, Guillaume Laforge glafo...@gmail.com wrote:
Who should be signing that grant?..
Paul asked the same question in
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-9341 - I think that's a
question for the Groovy team, from the ASF side it's whomever has
sufficient
You could sign it on behalf of the Groovy Core team
On Mar 26, 2015, at 4:44 AM, Guillaume Laforge glafo...@gmail.com wrote:
Me as the lead of the project?
But I can't say I have more rights than others.
Who has more rights than others? is it in terms of number of commits?
lines
Who should be signing that grant?
The copyright / IP is pretty much diluted, so not sure how / who should
this be dealt with?
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 9:06 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org
wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 8:40 AM, Cédric Champeau
cedric.champ...@gmail.com wrote:
Me as the lead of the project?
But I can't say I have more rights than others.
Who has more rights than others? is it in terms of number of commits?
lines contributed?
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 9:40 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org
wrote:
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 9:35 AM,
Bertrand,
It took me a second, but I think I found some threads of interest:
https://mail-search.apache.org/members/private-arch/board/201502.mbox/%3CCABD8fLVxK8jRT-Rdut9xC2RnHmQ4v9yywe4owNf=98ghdyk...@mail.gmail.com%3E
Emmanuel,
I apologize for hijacking your thread. Let me part (and create a new
thread) by saying Welcome, Groovy!
James
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 7:45 AM, James Carman
ja...@carmanconsulting.com wrote:
Bertrand,
It took me a second, but I think I found some threads of interest:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 12:03 PM, James Carman
ja...@carmanconsulting.com wrote:
We need to make sure we get these guidelines nailed down, because that is
not the advice we got when doing Tinker pop
Do you have archive links to the relevant discussions?
-Bertrand
Let's continue here. It seems there is some confusion around this
particular subject, because I don't know that we really reached a
point where we said this is what we're SUPPOSED to do in this
situation with TinkerPop. We just did what we thought was best at
the time. It would be good to have
We need to make sure we get these guidelines nailed down, because that is
not the advice we got when doing Tinker pop. Just seems like a very
similar situation. No one entity owns groovy. This is also a very likely
situation for us to encounter in the future, especially since two of the
major
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 9:07 AM Guillaume Laforge glafo...@gmail.com
wrote:
So ultimately, what do we do?
Do I (current Groovy project lead, thus project representative) need to
sign something on behalf of the Groovy community or something like that?
Or we just skip this step altogether since
We've only seen positive messages from the community at large about the
move, all supporting and praising the decision, in various forms, whether
on our mailing-lists, or twitter, etc.
So the community is already aware of it and supports this move.
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 2:15 PM, Martijn
I think we are going a bit too far here.
Groovy has been under the AL 2.0 license since it moves from BSD (back
in 2003). AL 2.0 says :
Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, each Contributor
hereby grants to You a perpetual, worldwide, non-exclusive, no-charge,
royalty-free,
So ultimately, what do we do?
Do I (current Groovy project lead, thus project representative) need to
sign something on behalf of the Groovy community or something like that?
Or we just skip this step altogether since that's the community's intention
as a whole?
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 1:59 PM,
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 12:58 PM, James Carman
ja...@carmanconsulting.com wrote:
...It would be good to have at least some codified guidelines
somewhere on a wiki page or something that will help newly-incubating
projects in similar situations
My view is that
-All committers need an
If a single legal entity has the copyright, the entity makes a grant.
If the code was built by a large community under the apache license,
there's no one to make a grant. 'The community' expressing its desire
to move to Apache is enough. This is an edge case of the principle
that we only accept
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 8:22 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
bdelacre...@apache.org wrote:
My view is that
-All committers need an iCLA
I think that we can agree upon and nobody is refuting that.
-Software that comes from outside the ASF needs to come with a software grant
This is the sticking
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 7:59 AM James Carman ja...@carmanconsulting.com
wrote:
Let's continue here. It seems there is some confusion around this
particular subject, because I don't know that we really reached a
point where we said this is what we're SUPPOSED to do in this
situation with
In the case of groovy, does Pivotal own it or does someone else own it?
Nobody owns it.
If
I look at https://github.com/groovy/groovy-core/blob/master/NOTICE it
indicates that an entity known as The Groovy community owns it, in which
case the SGA should probably come from them, no? Or is
Would the discussion on the dev@groovy list be enough 'evidence' for
the intent of the community to move to Apache?
Then it would possible be sufficient to archive those messages for
posterity (but I'm no lawyer)
Martijn
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 2:06 PM, Guillaume Laforge glafo...@gmail.com
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Roman Shaposhnik ro...@shaposhnik.org wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 7:51 AM, Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com
wrote:
In contrast, from a legal standpoint, a signed Software Grant doesn't change
much when the codebase is already under the ALv2. (Quite
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 5:42 PM, P. Taylor Goetz ptgo...@gmail.com wrote:
...what are the best practices to follow when creating a new project, outside
the ASF, with the goal of eventually contributing that work to an existing
ASF project?...
Following as much of our maturity model [1] as
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 9:03 AM, David Nalley da...@gnsa.us wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 11:18 AM, Roman Shaposhnik ro...@shaposhnik.org
wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 7:51 AM, Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com
wrote:
In contrast, from a legal standpoint, a signed Software Grant
IANAL, but this is what I learned when prepping code donations:
1) Every line of code is owned by some entity (a person or other legal
entity)
2) The person who owned it (may be different from the person who wrote it)
and added it to the collection of code did so under some terms.
3) If those
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 5:26 PM, Roman Shaposhnik ro...@shaposhnik.org wrote:
...Could you please provide an URL (if for nothing else,
just for a future reference).
Here:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 3:19 PM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
...For Groovy, it is sufficient for G to sign on
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 9:30 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
bdelacre...@apache.org wrote:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 5:26 PM, Roman Shaposhnik ro...@shaposhnik.org
wrote:
...Could you please provide an URL (if for nothing else,
just for a future reference).
Here:
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 3:19 PM,
This seems like an appropriate thread to raise a question that’s been in the
back of my head for a while…
If a new project is created on github (or elsewhere — i.e. outside of the ASF),
but with the intention that it would be contributed to an existing ASF project
(ALv2 license from day 1),
On 26/03/15 16:36, Roman Shaposhnik wrote:
the project. What I was looking for is a more general statement along the
lines of what Benson has provided earlier on this thread, but coming
from a VP of legal. This is for the purposes of documenting it for future
projects coming to ASF.
From
So, in summary, can we all agree that I (Groovy projet lead /
representative) can fill in the form, and say on behalf of the Groovy
community, I grant the rights to the ASF?
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 2:31 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com
wrote:
I think we are going a bit too far here.
I really have no opinion on the matter (IANAL). I'm just a virtual
paper pusher, but I did want to have a clear understanding of the
requirements so that when folks ask us on secretary@, we can guide
them to the right place or give them the right advice.
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 9:43 AM,
Le 26/03/15 14:43, Guillaume Laforge a écrit :
So, in summary, can we all agree that I (Groovy projet lead /
representative) can fill in the form, and say on behalf of the Groovy
community, I grant the rights to the ASF?
Jim said Just do it !...
Let's discuss about the legal aspect there, but
For JIRA, can you import our JIRA from Codehaus?
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GROOVY
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 1:31 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com
wrote:
Le 26/03/15 01:01, Konstantin Boudnik a écrit :
I have just helped bootstrapping two podlings in the last a couple of
months,
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 7:54 AM, Guillaume Laforge glafo...@gmail.com wrote:
For JIRA, can you import our JIRA from Codehaus?
http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/GROOVY
Emmanuel created INFRA-9340 for that and the main Codehaus Jira
migration ticket is INFRA-9116
-Bertrand
Thank you all! I still have a few days full time on Groovy, so if we can
leverage that to start the migration of the Git repo for example it would
be nice. Not sure what is required though, given we're migrating from
GitHub.
Also I have a document ready that describes the questions and necessary
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 8:40 AM, Cédric Champeau
cedric.champ...@gmail.com wrote:
...I have a document ready that describes the questions and necessary
steps to adapt our release process. It's an asciidoc document that I
convert locally to HTML, I wonder what's the best way to share it
For
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 8:40 AM, Cédric Champeau
cedric.champ...@gmail.com wrote:
...I still have a few days full time on Groovy, so if we can
leverage that to start the migration of the Git repo for example it would
be nice
As mentioned at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-9341
Le 26/03/15 15:11, Upayavira a écrit :
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015, at 01:31 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote:
I think we are going a bit too far here.
Groovy has been under the AL 2.0 license since it moves from BSD (back
in 2003). AL 2.0 says :
Subject to the terms and conditions of this License,
There is no official, legal entity which can make the actual
transfer. When we created the ASF, out of the Apache Group, all
members of the Apache Group signed the xfer which amounted to
the SGA at the time.
For Groovy, it is sufficient for G to sign on behalf of the
Groovy Core Team. If we could
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 7:22 AM, James Carman
ja...@carmanconsulting.com wrote:
And that covers us from a legal standpoint? Is there anything
special' about this situation that makes this appropriate?
If you have a codebase which was not previously under the ALv2 -- say it was
either
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 7:51 AM, Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com wrote:
In contrast, from a legal standpoint, a signed Software Grant doesn't change
much when the codebase is already under the ALv2. (Quite possibly it has zero
effect but I'd need to ask a lawyer about the text of the
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015, at 01:31 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote:
I think we are going a bit too far here.
Groovy has been under the AL 2.0 license since it moves from BSD (back
in 2003). AL 2.0 says :
Subject to the terms and conditions of this License, each Contributor
hereby grants to You
And that covers us from a legal standpoint? Is there anything
special' about this situation that makes this appropriate?
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Jim Jagielski j...@jagunet.com wrote:
There is no official, legal entity which can make the actual
transfer. When we created the ASF, out
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 10:22 AM, James Carman
ja...@carmanconsulting.com wrote:
And that covers us from a legal standpoint? Is there anything
special' about this situation that makes this appropriate?
There is nothing legal to cover here. Since all the code is AL 2.0,
legally, we are fine.
On Thu, Mar 26, 2015 at 10:51 AM, Marvin Humphrey
mar...@rectangular.com wrote:
If you have a codebase which was not previously under the ALv2 -- say it was
either proprietary or available under a different open source license -- then
the Software Grant is hugely important from a legal
Hi guys,
ok, the vote result is out, groovy has been accepted. I suppose the next steps
are :
- vote the 5 proposed persons as committers, once they have submitted
their ICLA (it's already done for a few of them)
- create groovy ML (dev, commits, users, private, ...)
- create the git repo
- push
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 9:02 AM, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
I most certainly am missing some steps... Feel free to add items.
Another question : who is in charge of all those tasks ?
The podling's Mentors, collectively. See the Mentor Guide:
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 9:44 AM, John D. Ament johndam...@apache.org wrote:
On that note, interesting thing, just saw the commit go in for infra to
create the mailing lists. Are we really allowing new committers to be the
mods? It's typically the mentors (from what I've seen).
Definitely
I usually start with mentor moderation and try to transition quickly to
committers.
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 9:56 AM, Jake Farrell jfarr...@apache.org wrote:
depends, if its private@ the mods control the subscription
-Jake
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Marvin Humphrey
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 6:00 PM, David Nalley da...@gnsa.us wrote:
it's not like we are limited to having just a few moderators. Nothing
wrong with mentors and initial committers both being on the list of
mods...
Especially when those non-mentor moderators are experienced open
source folks
On that note, interesting thing, just saw the commit go in for infra to
create the mailing lists. Are we really allowing new committers to be the
mods? It's typically the mentors (from what I've seen).
John
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 12:34 PM Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com
wrote:
On Wed,
+1
On Mar 25, 2015, at 12:56 PM, Jake Farrell jfarr...@apache.org wrote:
depends, if its private@ the mods control the subscription
-Jake
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com
wrote:
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 9:44 AM, John D. Ament
it's not like we are limited to having just a few moderators. Nothing
wrong with mentors and initial committers both being on the list of
mods.
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 12:57 PM, Ted Dunning ted.dunn...@gmail.com wrote:
I usually start with mentor moderation and try to transition quickly to
Technically, I just added two moderators. We can add some more, I guess.
One more thing : in order to add initial committers, the pdofling must
be listed in https://id.apache.org/acreq/members/?. How do we add it ?
-
To
Hi,
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 5:02 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
...- vote the 5 proposed persons as committers, once they have submitted
their ICLA (it's already done for a few of them)..
The iCLAs are needed but no need to vote them in, we just create their
accounts - the
Should just be the mentors to start with and not any of the new committers
that are not familiar with processes
-Jake
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 12:44 PM, John D. Ament johndam...@apache.org
wrote:
On that note, interesting thing, just saw the commit go in for infra to
create the mailing lists.
depends, if its private@ the mods control the subscription
-Jake
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 12:52 PM, Marvin Humphrey mar...@rectangular.com
wrote:
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 9:44 AM, John D. Ament johndam...@apache.org
wrote:
On that note, interesting thing, just saw the commit go in for infra
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 1:24 PM Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com
wrote:
Technically, I just added two moderators. We can add some more, I guess.
One more thing : in order to add initial committers, the pdofling must
be listed in https://id.apache.org/acreq/members/?. How do we add it ?
you need to setup the podling in podlings.xml at [1] and update the
incubator website
-Jake
[1]:
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/incubator/public/trunk/content/podlings.xml
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 1:23 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com
wrote:
Technically, I just added two
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 11:42 AM, Jake Farrell jfarr...@apache.org wrote:
podlings do not appear in the acreq script until they have been added to
podlings.xml, even if they file their ICLA with initial committer as part
of groovy.
secretary@ needs to get the grant before we can import the
Le 25/03/15 19:42, Jake Farrell a écrit :
podlings do not appear in the acreq script until they have been added to
podlings.xml, even if they file their ICLA with initial committer as part
of groovy.
It has been added in podlings.xml.
I'm currently fighting to get the groovy page to appears
Le 25/03/15 20:00, Roman Shaposhnik a écrit :
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
bdelacre...@apache.org wrote:
...Another question : who is in charge of all those tasks ?..
If you could create tickets like the
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-8968 example that
podlings do not appear in the acreq script until they have been added to
podlings.xml, even if they file their ICLA with initial committer as part
of groovy.
secretary@ needs to get the grant before we can import the code
-Jake
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 1:29 PM, John D. Ament
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 9:24 AM, Bertrand Delacretaz
bdelacre...@apache.org wrote:
...Another question : who is in charge of all those tasks ?..
If you could create tickets like the
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-8968 example that would
enable our infra team to get started.
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 10:26 PM, John D. Ament johndam...@apache.org wrote:
... Hope you don't mind, I just fixed Roman's name
Thanks!
-Bertrand
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For
would be good to get hold of groovy.codehaus.org. I was unable to find out
anything about using lists yesterday...
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail:
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 7:54 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com wrote:
...I'm currently fighting to get the groovy page to appears in the
incubator web site, I'm not lucky atm.
I just published
http://incubator.apache.org/projects/groovy.html
via
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 5:23 PM Bertrand Delacretaz bdelacre...@apache.org
wrote:
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 7:54 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com
wrote:
...I'm currently fighting to get the groovy page to appears in the
incubator web site, I'm not lucky atm.
I just published
The old Codehaus website on groovy.codehaus.org has been misbehaving and
showing only 404.
So I redirected all the trafic to the new website groovy-lang.org.
But you if you're searching about the lists, details are here on the new
site:
http://www.groovy-lang.org/mailing-lists.html
Guillaume
On
+1 - esp. for private@ list
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 09:57AM, Ted Dunning wrote:
I usually start with mentor moderation and try to transition quickly to
committers.
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 9:56 AM, Jake Farrell jfarr...@apache.org wrote:
depends, if its private@ the mods control the
I have just helped bootstrapping two podlings in the last a couple of months,
so I will add JIRAs to do the what needs to be done from the INFRA side of the
things.
Cos
I On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 05:02PM, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote:
Hi guys,
ok, the vote result is out, groovy has been accepted.
Le 26/03/15 01:01, Konstantin Boudnik a écrit :
I have just helped bootstrapping two podlings in the last a couple of months,
so I will add JIRAs to do the what needs to be done from the INFRA side of the
things.
Here is the Infra JIRA :
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-9338
As
Le 25/03/15 22:23, Bertrand Delacretaz a écrit :
On Wed, Mar 25, 2015 at 7:54 PM, Emmanuel Lécharny elecha...@gmail.com
wrote:
...I'm currently fighting to get the groovy page to appears in the
incubator web site, I'm not lucky atm.
I just published
72 matches
Mail list logo
