Re: [RESULT][IP CLEARANCE] Apache Felix Bundle Archive File Installer Extension

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [RESULT][IP CLEARANCE] Apache Felix Bundle Archive File Installer Extension

Karl Pauls
As we waited another 72 hours and no -1 has been cast the ip clearance
has been accepted and we will proceed to incorporate the code in
Felix.

regards,

Karl

On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 11:58 AM, Karl Pauls <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Great!
>
> I think we can just resume this vote. I updated the ip-clearance form
> and will wait another 72 hours.
>
> If no -1 is cast within the next 72 hours I will wrap it up and we
> will accept the contribution into Felix.
>
> regards,
>
> Karl
>
> On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 12:50 AM, John D. Ament <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> Yes, an ICLA on file should suffice.
>>
>> John
>>
>> On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 5:07 PM Karl Pauls <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>>> John,
>>>
>>> we have an ICLA for Jessica now.
>>>
>>> However, Intel is maintaining the position that it shouldn't be
>>> required to identify the software granted in detail but rather stating
>>> the top-level project it is granted to should be sufficient.
>>> Furthermore, they argue that they have done that many times over the
>>> years and only used the project level in Schedule B.
>>>
>>> Personally (IANAL), I think we should be good as the size of the
>>> donation isn't that big, Intel claims the copyright and has clearly
>>> green lighted Jessica to contribute in their name to Felix (and we
>>> have an ICLA as well) - hence:
>>>
>>> Are you willing to withdraw your veto based on the ICLA and the given CCLA?
>>>
>>> Otherwise, I guess I'll go and ask legal to see if they can clear this up.
>>>
>>> regards,
>>>
>>> Karl
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 2:41 PM, Karl Pauls <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> > John,
>>> >
>>> > yeah, I see that the schedule B is somewhat lacking. Oh well, ok, so
>>> > basically we are fine with a CCLA but in this case we don't think the
>>> > provided one is explicit enough (plus we want an ICLA for Jessica
>>> > Marz).
>>> >
>>> > I'll let them know and get back to this thread when there is either an
>>> > SGA or a new CCLA with the zip name and hash + ICLA for Jessica.
>>> >
>>> > Thank you for looking into this!
>>> >
>>> > regards,
>>> >
>>> > Karl
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 2:06 PM, John D. Ament <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>> >> Karl,
>>> >>
>>> >> I just read the CCLA that was filed.  I do not believe it is clear
>>> enough
>>> >> in the schedule B that it contains to conclude what is meant to be
>>> >> included.  Since you're a chair, you should have access to it at
>>> >>
>>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/private/documents/cclas/intel-corporation-felix.pdf
>>> >>
>>> >> Typically, to use a schedule B (as you're noting) I would expect:
>>> >>
>>> >> - A zip/tar archive with checksum & md5 listed OR
>>> >> - A list of files
>>> >>
>>> >> As well as:
>>> >>
>>> >> - ICLA(s) on file for the individual(s).
>>> >>
>>> >> So you could also do another CCLA but listing out one of those two items
>>> >> above, as well as request an ICLA from Jessica Marz.
>>> >>
>>> >> John
>>> >>
>>> >> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 7:08 AM Karl Pauls <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>> >>
>>> >>> John,
>>> >>>
>>> >>> it might typically be an SGA but it does say: "This grant can either
>>> >>> be done by the ASF Corporate CLA (via Schedule B) or the Software
>>> >>> Grant Agreement". Should we change that wording then?
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Anyways, I will follow-up with Intel via Jessica and let them know
>>> >>> that the provided Corporate CLA isn't sufficient and see if they can
>>> >>> provide a Software Grant Agreement instead. Thanks!
>>> >>>
>>> >>> regards,
>>> >>>
>>> >>> Karl
>>> >>>
>>> >>> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 1:01 PM, John D. Ament <[hidden email]>
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>> > Karl,
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > If the code is already Apache licensed, then I would check w/
>>> secretary@
>>> >>> or
>>> >>> > legal-discuss@ to confirm what documents need to be in place to
>>> remove
>>> >>> the
>>> >>> > Intel copyright claim (typically those would go in to the NOTICE
>>> file for
>>> >>> > Apache Felix going forward).  This is typically done as an SGA [1].
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > John
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > [1]: https://www.apache.org/licenses/software-grant-template.pdf
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> > On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 6:57 AM Karl Pauls <[hidden email]>
>>> wrote:
>>> >>> >
>>> >>> >> Hi John,
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> the code has been available as AL with the Intel copyright already
>>> >>> >> (the license headers in the files are unchanged). It is mainly an
>>> >>> >> attempt to get it contributed to Apache Felix. I told them we need
>>> the
>>> >>> >> following (from the incubator ip-clearance form):
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> "A software grant must be provided to the ASF. This grant can either
>>> >>> >> be done by the ASF Corporate CLA (via Schedule B) or the Software
>>> >>> >> Grant Agreement. The completed and signed grant must be emailed to
>>> >>> >> [hidden email]"
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> Consequently, they send (the received) CCLA which was supposed to
>>> >>> >> cover for that.
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> Apologies if I misunderstood the requirement. Could you please help
>>> me
>>> >>> >> out here and list what exactly we need from Intel and/or Jessica to
>>> >>> >> get this done?
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> regards,
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> Karl
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 12:48 PM, John D. Ament <
>>> [hidden email]>
>>> >>> >> wrote:
>>> >>> >> > Karl,
>>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >> > CCLA [1] is just a document indicating that the corporate entity
>>> has
>>> >>> >> given
>>> >>> >> > approval for individuals associated to it to contribute to Apache
>>> >>> under
>>> >>> >> > ICLAs.  It really doesn't provide any legal bearing to relicense
>>> code
>>> >>> >> > outside of an ICLA/SGA.
>>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >> > Usually when projects come to us with an IP clearance, its for a
>>> >>> >> > significant amount of code.  In those scenarios, there's an SGA
>>> >>> >> associated
>>> >>> >> > with the contribution (from a corporate entity) indicating that
>>> they
>>> >>> are
>>> >>> >> > licensing the ASF to use the code under the Apache license
>>> >>> (irrespective
>>> >>> >> of
>>> >>> >> > the original license).  I'm assuming that at Intel some # of
>>> engineers
>>> >>> >> > contributed to this code, and that it was under a proprietary
>>> license
>>> >>> >> until
>>> >>> >> > this JIRA ticket was filed.  In that case, SGA is almost always
>>> the
>>> >>> right
>>> >>> >> > document to get signed.
>>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >> > In the situations where we see ICLAs, there isn't usually a SGA
>>> >>> involved
>>> >>> >> > since its covered under an ICLA for that committer and needs to be
>>> >>> >> applied
>>> >>> >> > as a patch/pull request.  The other clear thing this indicates is
>>> a
>>> >>> loss
>>> >>> >> of
>>> >>> >> > provenance, since (I haven't looked at all of the source files)
>>> we're
>>> >>> >> > receiving a flat dump of code to be brought into an existing
>>> >>> repository.
>>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >> > So, unfortunately, until that's resolved I'm -1 to accepting it.
>>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >> > [1]: https://www.apache.org/licenses/cla-corporate.txt
>>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >> > On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 5:03 AM Karl Pauls <[hidden email]>
>>> >>> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >
>>> >>> >> >> Hi John,
>>> >>> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >> as far as I understand the situation, the contribution has been
>>> >>> >> >> submitted by Jessica Marz on behalf of Intel. The copyright is
>>> >>> >> >> entirely Intel and the CCLA received is _from_ Intel, covering
>>> >>> Jessica
>>> >>> >> >> Marz and the contribution. Does that help?
>>> >>> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >> regards,
>>> >>> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >> Karl
>>> >>> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >> On Thu, Dec 14, 2017 at 1:54 AM, John D. Ament <
>>> >>> [hidden email]>
>>> >>> >> >> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >> > Hello,
>>> >>> >> >> >
>>> >>> >> >> > Can you please clarify whether only a CCLA was received, or if
>>> >>> >> ICLAs/SGA
>>> >>> >> >> > were received as well?  The document indicates a CCLA was
>>> received
>>> >>> >> from
>>> >>> >> >> an
>>> >>> >> >> > individual, which doesn't sound right.
>>> >>> >> >> >
>>> >>> >> >> > John
>>> >>> >> >> >
>>> >>> >> >> > On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 1:32 AM Karl Pauls <
>>> [hidden email]>
>>> >>> >> wrote:
>>> >>> >> >> >
>>> >>> >> >> >> Hi,
>>> >>> >> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >> >> the Apache Felix project has received the contribution of the
>>> >>> Bundle
>>> >>> >> >> >> Archive File Installer Extension.
>>> >>> >> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >> >> - The code is attached to FELIX-5732 [0].
>>> >>> >> >> >> - The IP Clearance form has been committed [1].
>>> >>> >> >> >> - The acceptance vote has passed on the dev@felix malining
>>> list
>>> >>> [2].
>>> >>> >> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >> >> The clearance passes by lazy consensus if no -1 votes are cast
>>> >>> within
>>> >>> >> >> >> the next 72 hours.
>>> >>> >> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >> >> regards,
>>> >>> >> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >> >> Karl
>>> >>> >> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >> >> [0] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FELIX-5732
>>> >>> >> >> >> [1]
>>> >>> >> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>>
>>> https://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/felix-bar-file-install-extension.html
>>> >>> >> >> >> [2]
>>> >>> https://www.mail-archive.com/dev@.../msg44409.html
>>> >>> >> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >> >> --
>>> >>> >> >> >> Karl Pauls
>>> >>> >> >> >> [hidden email]
>>> >>> >> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >> >>
>>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >>> >> >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail:
>>> [hidden email]
>>> >>> >> >> >> For additional commands, e-mail:
>>> >>> [hidden email]
>>> >>> >> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >> --
>>> >>> >> >> Karl Pauls
>>> >>> >> >> [hidden email]
>>> >>> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >>> >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>> >>> >> >> For additional commands, e-mail:
>>> [hidden email]
>>> >>> >> >>
>>> >>> >> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >> --
>>> >>> >> Karl Pauls
>>> >>> >> [hidden email]
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >>> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>> >>> >> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>> >>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >>> --
>>> >>> Karl Pauls
>>> >>> [hidden email]
>>> >>>
>>> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>> >>>
>>> >>>
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > --
>>> > Karl Pauls
>>> > [hidden email]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Karl Pauls
>>> [hidden email]
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
> --
> Karl Pauls
> [hidden email]



--
Karl Pauls
[hidden email]

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