Cayenne IP Clearance status: 4 icla's not obtained

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
3 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Cayenne IP Clearance status: 4 icla's not obtained

Jean T. Anderson
Cayenne has obtained ICLAs for all committers, including retired
committers. They have also obtained ICLAs for any who submitted patches
-- with the exception of 4 patch submitters whose contributions were
minor, trivial, reworked or broken [1] ([1] is also included down
below). 6 files/classes are involved and an example of "trivial" is at
http://tinyurl.com/o9vpk [2].

Is this sufficient? Or does something more need to be done?

thanks,

 -jean

[1]
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-cayenne-dev/200607.mbox/%3cE908B156-EECE-44DB-8DD8-1F552F133184@...%3e
[2]
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/incubator-cayenne-dev/200608.mbox/%3cB486D845-00E2-4252-BA25-E8AE0BFA0D6C@...%3e

Below is the text of [1]:

Subject: CLAs status
Date: Mon, 31 Jul 2006 23:00:58 -0400
From: Andrus Adamchik <[hidden email]>
Reply-To: [hidden email]
To: [hidden email]

Looks like we have all CLA's that I could collect on file. It
includes 100% of the retired committers and almost all folks who
submitted contributions via patches. Here is a full list:

Holger Hoffstätte
Michael Misha Shengaout
Craig Miskell
Garry Watkins
Fabricio Voznika
Andriy Shapochka
Natalya Kholodnaya
Travis Cripps
Dirk Olmes
Scott Finnerty

(I also faxed today a signed PDF sent to me by Jeff Martin)

Don't know if we have to do anything special about a few other
contributions whose authors either never replied to my requests, or I
couldn't locate their new emails. Fortunately to us those are minor
contributions (see below). All of them are either patches to the
bigger modules, and/or fairly trivial, and/or already mostly reworked
by other committers. All of them were done with explicit intent to be
included in Cayenne under ObjectStyle Apache license clone.

Gary Jarrel (web app filter, DBCP factory)
Dario Bagato - (a patch for EOModel reverse engineering)
Mario Linke (small DB2 PK generator patch)
Heiko Wenzel (FirebirdAdapter - trivial and broken)

So do we need to do anything about these files? If not, we are done
with IP clearence.

Andrus




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Cayenne IP Clearance status: 4 icla's not obtained

Roy T. Fielding
On Aug 1, 2006, at 1:21 PM, Jean T. Anderson wrote:

> Cayenne has obtained ICLAs for all committers, including retired
> committers. They have also obtained ICLAs for any who submitted  
> patches
> -- with the exception of 4 patch submitters whose contributions were
> minor, trivial, reworked or broken [1] ([1] is also included down
> below). 6 files/classes are involved and an example of "trivial" is at
> http://tinyurl.com/o9vpk [2].
>
> Is this sufficient? Or does something more need to be done?

A new file is not a trivial addition, even if it is simply filling
in a template.  A change only qualifies as trivial if it is a simple
fix to an existing file (i.e., what the lawyers would call a "repair"
as opposed to a new expression).  I would just delete the one example
of a trivial new file, especially if it doesn't work anyway. Also,
"reworked" doesn't change the IP -- it just adds to it.

It matters more how the IP arrived into the project.  If the patches
were all published by the original authors to a public list or bugzilla
with the stated intention of being included in an open source product
under non-copyleft terms, then that should be sufficient for the ASF.
We just need to record the point of origin.

....Roy


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Cayenne IP Clearance status: 4 icla's not obtained

Andrus Adamchik
Fair enough. We have a track record for some of the submitted code  
[1]. The rest of it was sent to me directly (that was in the times  
before Jira). I'll try to ping others one more time, and if this  
fails, we'll just rewrite the remaining files. The "trivial" also  
means that they are trivial to rewrite :-)  ... although the ones  
that were just following the template will look almost exactly like  
the originals...

[1] http://issues.apache.org/cayenne/browse/CAY-33

Andrus


On Aug 2, 2006, at 12:31 AM, Roy T. Fielding wrote:

> On Aug 1, 2006, at 1:21 PM, Jean T. Anderson wrote:
>
>> Cayenne has obtained ICLAs for all committers, including retired
>> committers. They have also obtained ICLAs for any who submitted  
>> patches
>> -- with the exception of 4 patch submitters whose contributions were
>> minor, trivial, reworked or broken [1] ([1] is also included down
>> below). 6 files/classes are involved and an example of "trivial"  
>> is at
>> http://tinyurl.com/o9vpk [2].
>>
>> Is this sufficient? Or does something more need to be done?
>
> A new file is not a trivial addition, even if it is simply filling
> in a template.  A change only qualifies as trivial if it is a simple
> fix to an existing file (i.e., what the lawyers would call a "repair"
> as opposed to a new expression).  I would just delete the one example
> of a trivial new file, especially if it doesn't work anyway. Also,
> "reworked" doesn't change the IP -- it just adds to it.
>
> It matters more how the IP arrived into the project.  If the patches
> were all published by the original authors to a public list or  
> bugzilla
> with the stated intention of being included in an open source product
> under non-copyleft terms, then that should be sufficient for the ASF.
> We just need to record the point of origin.
>
> ....Roy
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]