Hi Dave, > On Jun 4, 2018, at 10:46 AM, Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> wrote: > > Hi - > > I think that the IP Clearance process has become very much a bureaucratic > process where the IPMC is contributing little of value. Very seldom is there > any feedback provided.
It is intended to be a bureaucratic process that is organized and run by the PMC with oversight by the IPMC. http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html : "The intent is to simply help to ensure, and record, that due diligence (Software Grant, CLA, Corp CLA, license and dependencies) has been paid to the incoming code" "The receiving PMC is responsible for doing the work. The Incubator is simply the repository of the needed information." "Note that only lazy consensus is required." > > (1) It is separate from the SGA process for new podlings, but it is similar > in that the Secretary will record the SGA and/or CCLA. > (2) The documentation is confusing about whether or not podlings need to > follow it or not. The documentation at https://incubator.apache.org/guides/ip_clearance.html discusses Podling IP Clearance. The documentation at http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html discusses non-Podling IP Clearance. Perhaps a rewrite of either or both of these would be useful. Patches welcome. > (3) Top Level Projects are supposed to understand how to clear IP as that is > a major part of the incubation process. If there are any questions the > legal-discuss mailing list and JIRA are available. > (4) The Incubator is already stretched to provide Mentoring to all of our > Podlings and IP Clearance seems to be off topic and not really scalable. Wide visibility is one result of the process being performed under the auspices of the incubator. Lazy consensus means that overworked IPMC members do not need to be involved if they choose not to be. But they can still see that a big code base is being proposed going directly to a TLP. > (5) Once a TLP graduates from the Incubator it seems regressive to have to go > back unless there is a Community around the grant to be Incubated. That would > lead to a Podling Proposal and not IP Clearance. > > I think that the IPMC should recommend to the Board that this recording > process be fully moved to the Secretary. I'm afraid I don't see the problem that this change would solve. > > Regards, > Dave Craig L Russell Secretary, Apache Software Foundation c...@apache.org http://db.apache.org/jdo --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
