And we've filed the SGA. The ICLAs are still churning as each submitter learns what data is required on the form, though. ;)
On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 7:49 AM hulk <hulk.webs...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Many thanks for John's help. I think we can handle it with this input, > thanks a lot. > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 8:06 PM John D. Ament <johndam...@apache.org> wrote: > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 5:08 AM Sheng Wu <wu.sheng.841...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > SGA is not required if the project is on a personal repository, this > > > > > > > > > SGAs can apply for individuals and corporations [1]. Doesn't matter > > where it's sourced from. We have received a number of SGAs in the past > > that just represent a single individual, or non incorporated entities that > > choose to be represented by a single person (see Groovy as an example). > > > > > > > individual's employer(if have) is recommended to submit CCLA(but needs > > > to evaluate by the owner about his contract) > > > > > > > The CCLA is really for the case where the employer explicitly wants an > > agreement in place indicating the contributor can contribute the code. I'm > > not aware of any policy we have (at Apache) requiring it. [2] > > > > More comments below specific to kvrocks. > > > > > > > But this isn't the Kvrocks case. > > > > > > Sheng Wu 吴晟 > > > Twitter, wusheng1108 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tison <wander4...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 16:15写道： > > > > > > > > Thanks for your inputs. > > > > > > > > Try to summarize the discussion: > > > > > > > > * Apache requires a SGA from the *current* copyright holder of the > > > software > > > > to grant permission for ASF. > > > > > > > We don't actually (at least not always but it does tend to be the easiest > > way to deal with it since most incubating projects are changing license). > > Work with your mentors/champion to figure this out, but if a large enough > > set of ICLAs is done to cover all main contributions and the source code is > > already Apache licensed then you may be fine. > > > > > > > > * If the current copyright holder is Meitu, then they should sign a > > grant > > > > with Exhibit A barely "Kvrocks". > > > > > > > > However, if the current copyright holder is "Kvrocks contributors", > > since > > > > it's a virtual entity, a certain contributor on behalf of the community > > > > should sign the SGA. > > > > > > > > Did I get it right? Is there some other proposal that got into the > > > > incubator without a SGA from a certain "company". > > > > > > > To answer this, you need to understand what the SGA is saying; IANAL. > > Section 2 makes the assumption that the grantor has permissions to be the > > grantor. When Meitu granted the source code, they gave whoever full rights > > to do whatever the grant said they can do. It wouldn't be correct to ask > > Meitu to file another grant, but whoever is filing the grant should ensure > > that what they are doing (Section 1 of the SGA) is in compliance with that > > grant, which would satisfy Section 2. I'm assuming that KvrocksLabs isn't > > a business entity, just an unincorporated group of individuals working on > > the project. It's fairly common that opensource projects merge code > > together, I'm not sure the state of KvrocksLabs before the grant that Meitu > > gave. > > > > TL;DR I believe someone representing KvrocksLabs can sign a SGA with the > > assumption that the original grant from Meitu created KvrocksLabs. Ideally > > that person should be whoever received the grant from Meitu. > > > > > > [1]: https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html#grants > > [2]: https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html#clas > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Best, > > > > tison. > > > > > > > > > > > > Sheng Wu <wu.sheng.841...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 15:42写道： > > > > > > > > > > but I think it's right that meitu should claim clearly about the > > > > > copyright > > > > > date since the > > > > > > > > > > Do you mean there is no single Meitu employee(s) was > > > > > working/contributed to that project ever since? > > > > > Because the org is virtual on GitHub, and meitu can't sign CCLA or > > SGA > > > > > to that virtual group back then, I think one way or another, Meitu > > > > > still need to prove the SGA from the transfer date to now. > > > > > It is better for meitu to sign the SGA to declare all > > > > > contributions(from beginning to now), others(individuals) would > > submit > > > > > their ICLA(or other companies' SGA) for some codes after the > > transfer. > > > > > > > > > > Sheng Wu 吴晟 > > > > > Twitter, wusheng1108 > > > > > > > > > > hulk <hulk.webs...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 15:06写道： > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks for junping reply. > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, we also agree that should grant the whole source code > > > repository > > > > > for > > > > > > ASF, > > > > > > but I think it's right that meitu should claim clearly about the > > > > > copyright > > > > > > date since the > > > > > > the repository was moved to another organization after then. > > > > > > > > > > > > So our question is should we need to sign extra other agreements > > for > > > > > > podling IP Clearance? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 2:57 PM 俊平堵 <junping...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think SGA here should be the same as other project. > > > > > > > As Craig mentioned above, it is code’s copyright owner ( a legal > > > > > entity or > > > > > > > natural human) to grant permission for ASF. If only for code > > during > > > > > certain > > > > > > > period, that means some code is not get permitted for Apache > > which > > > is > > > > > very > > > > > > > weird. :( > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hulk <hulk.webs...@gmail.com>于2022年4月25日 周一上午11:52写道： > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks all, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > From the meitu side, they think should claim the date clearly > > > > > instead of > > > > > > > > implicitly, > > > > > > > > so I'm not sure whether is ok to add this clarification on SGA > > or > > > > > not? > > > > > > > > If not, are there other agreements that should be signed for > > > podling > > > > > IP > > > > > > > > Clearance? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 11:13 AM Sheng Wu < > > > wu.sheng.841...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Please check the SGA template of ASF, like Craig mentioned, > > > > > usually, > > > > > > > > > there is no date/timestamp included. > > > > > > > > > The foundation just needs legal approval that the company > > > granted > > > > > to > > > > > > > > > move codes to the foundation, others(like individuals) should > > > > > submit > > > > > > > > > ICLA(s) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Sheng Wu 吴晟 > > > > > > > > > Twitter, wusheng1108 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > hulk <hulk.webs...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 10:19写道： > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the > > > > > project > > > > > > > > > > > moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner > > > from a > > > > > > > > > > > license perspective? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Kvrocks has transferred from the meitu to the KvrocksLabs > > > > > > > organization > > > > > > > > > and claimed the copyright belongs to the Kvrocks community. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is there a place/way to track this event? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We didn't track this event in a public place. The lawyer > > > thinks > > > > > they > > > > > > > > can > > > > > > > > > only grant the copyright when all of the contributors are > > their > > > > > > > employees > > > > > > > > > (before 2020.3.23). After that, the copyright should belong > > to > > > the > > > > > > > > Kvrocks > > > > > > > > > community. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Apr 25, 2022 at 8:29 AM Sheng Wu < > > > > > wu.sheng.841...@gmail.com> > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I think IPMC don't prepare SGA, SGA(s) are from original > > > owners. > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on > > > belong > > > > > to the > > > > > > > > > Kvrocks > > > > > > > > > >> community. > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> I think the key is how they make this conclusion. Was the > > > > > project > > > > > > > > > >> moving to a 3rd party repository, and changing the owner > > > from a > > > > > > > > > >> license perspective? Is there a place/way to track this > > > event? > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> Sheng Wu 吴晟 > > > > > > > > > >> Twitter, wusheng1108 > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > >> tison <wander4...@gmail.com> 于2022年4月25日周一 06:46写道： > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > Hi IPMCs, > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > Recently we voted and accepted Kvrocks to the > > > Incubator[1]. > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > While the IPMCs and PPMCs preparing the SGA, we meet an > > > issue > > > > > that > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > >> > original entity sign a SGA but explicit limit the > > > agreement on > > > > > > > code > > > > > > > > > from > > > > > > > > > >> > 2018 to 2020. > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > Its lawyer said that code contributions from then on > > > belong > > > > > to the > > > > > > > > > Kvrocks > > > > > > > > > >> > community. > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > The issue is that since the original entity sign such a > > > SGA > > > > > and > > > > > > > all > > > > > > > > > core > > > > > > > > > >> > contributors sign ICLAs, is there other agreements > > should > > > be > > > > > > > signed > > > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > > > >> > podling IP Clearance? > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > Best, > > > > > > > > > >> > tison. > > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > >> > [1] > > > > > > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/shxcg56j3x36t75x63voj82s6hhdtrcv > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
