On Sat, Jan 14, 2017 at 12:51 AM Henri Yandell wrote:
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 4:46 AM, John D. Ament
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > - Its not usual for a podling to receive a subsequent donation.
> >
>
> Doesn't the IP Clearance also cover the initial codebase review? Or is
> there a very similar page
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 4:46 AM, John D. Ament
wrote:
>
>
> - Its not usual for a podling to receive a subsequent donation.
>
Doesn't the IP Clearance also cover the initial codebase review? Or is
there a very similar page that's covering that?
> - I hate that the IPMC is responsible for all T
On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 12:36 AM Henri Yandell wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 7:52 AM, William A Rowe Jr
> wrote:
>
> > On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 6:06 AM, John D. Ament
> > wrote:
> > > IMHO, IP Clearance in of itself is confusing. For software being
> > > relicensed (under an SGA) it shouldn'
On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 7:52 AM, William A Rowe Jr
wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 6:06 AM, John D. Ament
> wrote:
> > IMHO, IP Clearance in of itself is confusing. For software being
> > relicensed (under an SGA) it shouldn't be needed.
>
> Well, it is needed, even where that devolves to "has
On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 6:06 AM, John D. Ament wrote:
> IMHO, IP Clearance in of itself is confusing. For software being
> relicensed (under an SGA) it shouldn't be needed.
Well, it is needed, even where that devolves to "has all SGA paperwork
for this incoming contribution and corresponding ICL
IMHO, IP Clearance in of itself is confusing. For software being
relicensed (under an SGA) it shouldn't be needed. In addition, like any
other podling coming in, work may be needed to generate a valid release
from the donation. It may not just work.
So i'd actually prefer to just drop the two b
Hi,
> * Check and make sure that all items depended upon by the project are
> compatible with the license guidance given here:
> http://www.apache.org/legal/resolved.html
Dependancies are often seen as external so perhaps “all items contained in or
depended upon by the project” would be better?
It was pointed out on legal-discuss@ that the IP Clearance terms in
http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/ip-clearance-template.html are
odd. Namely the two items:
---
* Check and make sure that for all items included with the distribution
that is not under the Apache license, we have
