The vote has been passed with 10 binding +1s:
* Seetharam Venkatesh
* Hyunsik Choi
* Rob Vesse
* Sergio Fernández
* Henry Saputra
* Andrew Purtell
* Stack
* Julien Le Dem
* Jakob Homan
* Edward J. Yoon
There were 5 non-binding +1:
* Luke Han
* Hongbin Ma
* Moon Soo Lee
* Byoung-Gon Chun
* Alexand
On 11/27/15, 10:50 PM, "Ted Dunning" wrote:
>
>Explain that you represent an apache project which would like to
>incorporate the project in question. Ask if they are cool with their
>contribution being licensed as ASL.
The code is already under AL. I think we want them to give permission to
m
Explain that you represent an apache project which would like to incorporate
the project in question. Ask if they are cool with their contribution being
licensed as ASL.
A simple email confirmation should be fine.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 28, 2015, at 12:40, Alex Harui wrote:
>
> Str
Pierre,
I don't understand your comment. Could you help clarify it?
A) was this sarcasm? If so, please indicate what you are being sarcastic about
and I will respond however you like. If this was just intended as snarky, no
need to clarify
B) do you think that there is a real issue here?
C)
Hi,
> Strange, my GH view showed 12.
That includes pull requests.
> And what do we ask? To sign an SGA or something else?
a) If they are OK to have the code donated to Apache b) have they signed an
ICLA for the project and if not would they be willing to sign an Apache one.
> And how many
The key question is whether the code winds up in an apache repo. If it is
downloaded during build, no problem. If you download it and check it in as
source then we need to cross t's and dot i's a bit.
The term bundling is not terribly precise.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 28, 2015, at 2:28
On 11/27/15, 3:36 PM, "Justin Mclean" wrote:
>Hi,
>
>> 1) Swiz Framework.
>
>There have been 6 contributors (not looking at pull requests), 5 of which
>have ben active in github this year. Would it be so hard to ask them?
Strange, my GH view showed 12. And what do we ask? To sign an SGA or
s
Hi,
> 1) Swiz Framework.
There have been 6 contributors (not looking at pull requests), 5 of which have
ben active in github this year. Would it be so hard to ask them?
> 2) AS3Commons
Which has two contributors and no closed pull requests. One of the contributors
has already been asked, woul
Alex wrote:
>sounds like PMCs are not empowrd to make a judgement call gere.
>Here are two cases:
Can anybody do the grunt work/due diligence in obtaining
permission/authorization/whatever for ASF clearence, or is that function limted
to current/former members of the community the cde originate
On 11/27/15, 7:34 AM, "Marvin Humphrey" wrote:
>On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 7:28 AM, Alex Harui wrote:
>> Since you are VP-Legal, I a willing to abide by your
>> answer. If the answer is a flat "No", then fine, we can continue
>>working
>> with it as 3rd party, but if the answer is "Yes, but unde
I guess, that is the difference between 'The Apache Way' and anyother
way
Best regards,
Pierre Smits
*OFBiz Extensions Marketplace*
http://oem.ofbizci.net/oci-2/
On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 4:34 PM, Marvin Humphrey
wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 7:28 AM, Alex Harui wrote:
> > Since you are
On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 7:28 AM, Alex Harui wrote:
> Since you are VP-Legal, I a willing to abide by your
> answer. If the answer is a flat "No", then fine, we can continue working
> with it as 3rd party, but if the answer is "Yes, but understand the risks"
> as Ted said, then the PMC is empowere
Hi Jim,
In these cases, we are not creating a new PMC around these code bases, we
are placing it under control of an existing PMC. Plus, there is
effectively no community left. Nobody has made a change to these projects
in 4 years. A major contributor from each project has indicated their
desi
+1 binding
On Thursday, November 26, 2015, Ted Dunning wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> I think that forcing experienced community developers into one model or the
> other is unnecessary. Let them in as they would like.
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 4:51 PM, Greg Stein > wrote:
>
> > -1 (binding)
>
+1 binding
On Thursday, November 26, 2015, Ted Dunning wrote:
> +1 binding
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 6:50 AM, Konstantin Boudnik > wrote:
>
> > Come to think of it a bit more, yes I am not satisfied with the outcome
> of
> > the CTR/RTC exchange in the project.
> >
> > Hence changing my v
As with many other things, there is a difference between what we CAN
do and what we SHOULD do.
We CAN take whatever permissively licensed codebase we want, basically,
and create an Apache PMC around it. All we would be doing is what
we allow others to do w/ our projects. As long as we abide by the
I think the chances of anyone making so much as a squeak in those projects is
close to zero.
Being that’s the case, my takeaway is that it’s ok to take them.
Harbs
On Nov 27, 2015, at 3:42 PM, Ted Dunning wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 4:32 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
>
>> On 11/26/15, 4:47 PM,
On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 4:32 PM, Alex Harui wrote:
> On 11/26/15, 4:47 PM, "Ted Dunning" wrote:
>
> >There are two issues, one is the SGA and the other is the contributor
> >license agreements (ICLA) that are desirable to make sure that all of the
> >contributors understood that they were contri
18 matches
Mail list logo
