milagro-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Justin Mclean <jmcl...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Request for review the polling report
Date Thu, 08 Nov 2018 08:14:31 GMT
HI,

> “….most of the initial committers haven't signed ICLAs. They did however report this
month.”
> 
> I know for a fact that, in addition to me, these folks have signed ICLA as they are listed
as committers on http://people.apache.org/committer-index.html:
> 
> Go Yamamoto
> Kealan McCusker
> Patrick Hilt
> Stanislav Mihaylov
> Jan Willem Janssen

These are people on the initial committer list / PPMC list who have AFAIK not signed ICLAs
or if they have they are missing from the roster:

	• Akira Nagai (NTT)
	• Fuji Hitoshi (NTT)
	• Genoveffa Pagano (Certivox/MIRACL)
	• Jordan Katserov (Certivox/MIRACL)
	• Kenji Takahishi (NTT)
	• Michael Scott (Certivox/MIRACL)
	• Milen Rangelove (Certivox/MIRACL)
	• Mitko Yugovski (Certivox/MIRACL)
	• Nick Pateman (Certivox/MIRACL)
	• Simeon Aladhem (Certivox/MIRACL)
	• Stanislav Mihaylov (Certivox/MIRACL)
	• Tetsutaro Kobayashi (NTT)

> I just want to point out that MIRACL, the company, filed a Software/Patent Grant and
Corporate CCLA on Thursday, March 26, 2016 which covered the GitHub repos in question and
from what I can see on the contributors listed to the repos they are covered/listed in the
Corporate CCLA. I'm assuming that checks all the boxes then to port the GitHub repos in question
over to the Milagro Apache Git repos, right?

It may or may not, the corporate CLA covers MIRACL not the ASF. What you would need is a software
grant and I’m not sure MIRACL ended up granting the software to the ASF as it’s not listed
here [3]? If so it would only cover what was in the grant, not software developed after that
outside of the ASF.  You would also need to check that all people who have made significant
contributions are also covered by ICLAs. [1] Look for example what Apache Dubbo did. [2] Feel
free to check / ask about any of this on legal discuss for a second opinion as INAL.

> To reiterate I think it is in the best interest of the project to take the code in GitHub
that was already covered under the CLA and do a merge into the Apache Git so we don't lose
the years of development spent on it per Giorgio’s plan. 
> 
> I note that the code is licensed under the Apache License 2.0.

ASF projects don’t take other ASF license code without permission from the owners, to do
so could be viewed as a hostile fork and we don’t do that. Again if in doubt please ask
about this on the incubator general list or on legal discuss list.

Thanks,
Justin

1. https://incubator.apache.org/guides/ip_clearance.html
2. https://github.com/apache/incubator-dubbo/wiki/CLA-signing-status
3. http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html	


Mime
View raw message