incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Leo Simons <>
Subject Re: Making a non ASF project, ASF friendly
Date Mon, 15 Jan 2007 09:57:14 GMT
On Jan 15, 2007, at 5:35 AM, Chris Howe wrote:
> The purpose of the other project is to be a sort of
> impromptu venue for collaboration of things related to
> the ASF project.  The ASF project in question (The
> Apache Open for Business Project - OFBiz), has a
> history of being relatively stable in SVN.  So
> generally, contributions that get put back into the
> project _work.  Following the one contributor per JIRA
> patch approach makes it difficult for people in the
> community to share their works in progress.  Since the
> goal is to share their works in progress to get them
> "inclusion worthy" anything that moves from Project A
> to OFBiz will by design have more than one
> contributor.

Ah. Well, you know, OFBiz is a bit of a different kind of project  
from a lot of other ASF projects, so the fact that our "default  
mechanisms" might not apply that well is not so surprising. If I were  
the OFBiz project, I'd probably consider setting up some kind of  
"sandbox" *right here at the ASF* for the community to work in for  
this kind of thing, but I'm not so sure that makes sense for OFBiz.

>> 4) Project A releases a source and binary
>> distribution (probably as
>> a .jar)
> Most of the contributions that come from Project A
> will be derivative of OFBiz, so jars end up creating
> redundant code or make it difficult to incorporate.

Heh, that's an OFBiz design flaw, or rather, OFBiz hasn't been  
optimized for this style of legal-mess-alleviating modularity yet :)

>> 5) an ASF project does not want to do #4, so all the
>> developers on
>> Project A sign a CLA and a code grant for a sizeable
>> chunk of the
>> Project A source. The ASF project follows the
>> incubator's "IP
>> clearance" process.
> While I see #5 being the front runner approach, this
> does put quite a burden on the ASF project. In work
> that is to be contributed from Project A to the ASF
> project the temporary "partnership" wants to
> collectively and individually grant the ASF the
> license as in #2, but has no mechanism to provide that
> grant collectively.

(IANAL) That can actually be ok. They can grant the rights to some of  
their IP, *including* whatever rights they have to the collective  
work. If all the individuals that contributed to the collective work  
do so, I think that means as much to the ASF as a collective grant.  
There's still the burden to make sure, of course, and document.

> P.S. I never thought it would be this hard to give
> stuff away for free :-)

Heh :). Well, that's just because you're trying to do a specific  
thing (this Project A) in a specific way, *and* optimizing ahead of  
time to support integration with a complex process that hasn't been  
thought through yet for the specific thing you want to do. A long,  
hard, drawn-out discussion with no conclusion is usually what you  
get, and then months down the road, hopefully the process has been  
thought through and documented, and no-one will have to suffer your  
hardship again! Hang in there!



To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message