cut the crap

[Roy T. Fielding]

I've wasted too much time today on the stupid IP Clearance template
that insists on asking a bunch of irrelevant questions about
decisions that the Incubator is not responsible for making.
The required IP clearance questions should be:

    Date:
    Identify the Contribution:
    Identify the Contributor(s):
    What are the filenames for the applicable
      software grant(s):
      Corporate CLA(s):
      Individual CLA(s):
    Location of initial import:
    Destination PMC:

That's it.

Licensing the artifacts, removal of dependencies, changing headers,
and checking for product trade names are all activities of the PMC
before a release is made, NOT before an import.  Committer access
is a responsibility of the destination PMC.  Prior distribution
rights are irrelevant.  Where on earth did this crap come from?

The template reads like a friggin nanny's club treatise on the
correct angle to wipe one's ass.  The only reason we have this
form is to record the connection between grant and initial commit.
Don't waste our time with anything else.

....Roy


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...

[Scott O'Bryan]

ROTFLMHO..  So tell us how you really feel Roy.  :)  For what it's
worth, I agree with you, especially for projects entering incubator.

Scott

Roy T. Fielding wrote:

> I've wasted too much time today on the stupid IP Clearance template
> that insists on asking a bunch of irrelevant questions about
> decisions that the Incubator is not responsible for making.
> The required IP clearance questions should be:
>
>    Date:
>    Identify the Contribution:
>    Identify the Contributor(s):
>    What are the filenames for the applicable
>      software grant(s):
>      Corporate CLA(s):
>      Individual CLA(s):
>    Location of initial import:
>    Destination PMC:
>
> That's it.
>
> Licensing the artifacts, removal of dependencies, changing headers,
> and checking for product trade names are all activities of the PMC
> before a release is made, NOT before an import.  Committer access
> is a responsibility of the destination PMC.  Prior distribution
> rights are irrelevant.  Where on earth did this crap come from?
>
> The template reads like a friggin nanny's club treatise on the
> correct angle to wipe one's ass.  The only reason we have this
> form is to record the connection between grant and initial commit.
> Don't waste our time with anything else.
>
> ....Roy
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...

[robert burrell donkin-2]

On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 8:57 PM, Roy T. Fielding <fielding@...> wrote:

> I've wasted too much time today on the stupid IP Clearance template
>  that insists on asking a bunch of irrelevant questions about
>  decisions that the Incubator is not responsible for making.
>  The required IP clearance questions should be:
>
>    Date:
>    Identify the Contribution:
>    Identify the Contributor(s):
>    What are the filenames for the applicable
>      software grant(s):
>      Corporate CLA(s):
>      Individual CLA(s):
>    Location of initial import:
>    Destination PMC:
>
>  That's it.

pretty much agree

the VOTE link is useful but maybe the incubator doesn't need to check
that a PMC is conducting it's affairs correctly. not clear how much
oversight the board expects the incubator to perform for IP
clearances.

>  Licensing the artifacts, removal of dependencies, changing headers,
>  and checking for product trade names are all activities of the PMC
>  before a release is made, NOT before an import.  Committer access
>  is a responsibility of the destination PMC.  Prior distribution
>  rights are irrelevant.  Where on earth did this crap come from?

dunno. stuff only gets fixed once someone notices it's wrong. it's CTR
so feel free to remove the cruft.

>  The template reads like a friggin nanny's club treatise on the
>  correct angle to wipe one's ass.  The only reason we have this
>  form is to record the connection between grant and initial commit.
>  Don't waste our time with anything else.

:-)

IMHO writing documentation is tough and it's hard to target the
audience correctly. probably an annotated template would work better
(if anyone has some spare cycles to implement).

- robert

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...

[robert burrell donkin-2]

On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 9:05 PM, Scott O'Bryan <darkarena@...> wrote:
> ROTFLMHO..  So tell us how you really feel Roy.  :)  For what it's worth, I
> agree with you, especially for projects entering incubator.

submit a patch ;-)

- robert

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...

[Noel J. Bergman]

Roy T. Fielding wrote:

> that insists on asking a bunch of irrelevant questions about
> decisions that the Incubator is not responsible for making.

> Where on earth did this crap come from?

According to SVN

 http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/public/trunk/site-author/ip-clearanc
e/ip-clearance-template.xml?view=log

the first version was from me, in consultation with the Board, four (4)
years ago in 2004, and was a stripped down version of the Incubation
template.  Comparing the current to the original:

  http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/incubator/public/trunk/site-author/ip-clearan
ce/ip-clearance-template.xml?r1=46659&r2=519113&diff_format=h

I suspect that your issues are in the original.

> The required IP clearance questions should be

Contributions welcomed.

        --- Noel



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...

[Noel J. Bergman]

> For what it's worth, I agree with you, especially for projects entering
incubator.

The IP clearance template isn't generally applicable to projects entering
the Incubator.  It is for processing code grants to existing projects.

        --- Noel



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...

[Noel J. Bergman]

Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:

> maybe the incubator doesn't need to check that a PMC is conducting
> it's affairs correctly. not clear how much oversight the board
> expects the incubator to perform for IP clearances.

IIRC, some but not extensive.  Just check to make sure that the IP clearance
is filed properly.

> it's hard to target the audience correctly.

It was specifically intended to tell PMCs what was expected of them and how
to do it, since it is not assumed that they have a clue.  Keeping in mind
that at the time, none of them had a clue that there was an issue, much less
how to handle the task, that's not unreasonable.

        --- Noel



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...

[Scott O'Bryan]

Right, for those it makes sense to me...

Noel J. Bergman wrote:

>> For what it's worth, I agree with you, especially for projects entering
>>    
> incubator.
>
> The IP clearance template isn't generally applicable to projects entering
> the Incubator.  It is for processing code grants to existing projects.
>
> --- Noel
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...
>
>  

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...

[William A. Rowe, Jr.]

Roy T. Fielding wrote:

> I've wasted too much time today on the stupid IP Clearance template
> that insists on asking a bunch of irrelevant questions about
> decisions that the Incubator is not responsible for making.
> The required IP clearance questions should be:
>
>    Date:
>    Identify the Contribution:
>    Identify the Contributor(s):
>    What are the filenames for the applicable
>      software grant(s):
>      Corporate CLA(s):
>      Individual CLA(s):
>    Location of initial import:
>    Destination PMC:
>
> That's it.

One more;

      Determine www.a.o/licenses/exports implications
      for notifications.

That's my last crypto audit step, putting that request to all incubator
podlings and ensuring this mess is under control moving forwards.  Without
adding this as an IP import step, it won't happen.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...

[robert burrell donkin-2]

On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 7:55 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
<wrowe@...> wrote:

> Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>
> > I've wasted too much time today on the stupid IP Clearance template
> > that insists on asking a bunch of irrelevant questions about
> > decisions that the Incubator is not responsible for making.
> > The required IP clearance questions should be:
> >
> >   Date:
> >   Identify the Contribution:
> >   Identify the Contributor(s):
> >   What are the filenames for the applicable
> >     software grant(s):
> >     Corporate CLA(s):
> >     Individual CLA(s):
> >   Location of initial import:
> >   Destination PMC:
> >
> > That's it.
> >
>
>  One more;
>
>      Determine www.a.o/licenses/exports implications
>      for notifications.
>
>  That's my last crypto audit step, putting that request to all incubator
>  podlings and ensuring this mess is under control moving forwards.  Without
>  adding this as an IP import step, it won't happen.

i've committed a stripped down template and moved the prose into a
guide. this guide is just copy ATM but i'll try to find some time to
tidy it up sometime tomorrow.

feedback on the template appreciated or just jump in with a patch ;-)

- robert

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...

[Noel J. Bergman]

Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:

> i've committed a stripped down template and moved the prose into a
> guide. this guide is just copy ATM

With all due and sincere respect to Roy, the current IP Clearance form was
done in conjunction with the Board.  Over the past several years it has been
modified slightly by the current President, Chair, and at least one other
Director, so it is not some unknown quantity haphazardly slapped together.
Given that we now have a Legal Committee, any substantive revision of that
form should be run through them.

This is not a comment on content, but on process.  Let's do due diligence to
the document.

        --- Noel



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...

[robert burrell donkin-2]

On 4/23/08, Noel J. Bergman <noel@...> wrote:

> Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>
> > i've committed a stripped down template and moved the prose into a
> > guide. this guide is just copy ATM
>
> With all due and sincere respect to Roy, the current IP Clearance form was
> done in conjunction with the Board.  Over the past several years it has been
> modified slightly by the current President, Chair, and at least one other
> Director, so it is not some unknown quantity haphazardly slapped together.
> Given that we now have a Legal Committee, any substantive revision of that
> form should be run through them.
>
> This is not a comment on content, but on process.  Let's do due diligence to
> the document.

If the IP template should be RTC then it should be moved into the
policy area. But IMO the incubator is not the right place for
normative legal policy: the legal committee should maintain policy.

I agree with Roy. The educational aspect obscures the function. The
current template is in need of revision since it satisfies neither
goal.

But I don't have the energy to push through any policy changes ATM.
Just revert the changes and open another JIRA...

Robert

>
> --- Noel
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...
>
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...

[robert burrell donkin-2]

On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 11:14 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin
<robertburrelldonkin@...> wrote:

> On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 7:55 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
>  <wrowe@...> wrote:
>  > Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>  >
>  > > I've wasted too much time today on the stupid IP Clearance template
>  > > that insists on asking a bunch of irrelevant questions about
>  > > decisions that the Incubator is not responsible for making.
>  > > The required IP clearance questions should be:
>  > >
>  > >   Date:
>  > >   Identify the Contribution:
>  > >   Identify the Contributor(s):
>  > >   What are the filenames for the applicable
>  > >     software grant(s):
>  > >     Corporate CLA(s):
>  > >     Individual CLA(s):
>  > >   Location of initial import:
>  > >   Destination PMC:
>  > >
>  > > That's it.
>  > >
>  >
>  >  One more;
>  >
>  >      Determine www.a.o/licenses/exports implications
>  >      for notifications.
>  >
>  >  That's my last crypto audit step, putting that request to all incubator
>  >  podlings and ensuring this mess is under control moving forwards.  Without
>  >  adding this as an IP import step, it won't happen.
>
>  i've committed a stripped down template and moved the prose into a
>  guide. this guide is just copy ATM but i'll try to find some time to
>  tidy it up sometime tomorrow.
>
>  feedback on the template appreciated or just jump in with a patch ;-)

after process objections, i've reverted the source and withdraw this
patch. if anyone wants to pick it up, i've opened  a JIRA.

- robert

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...

[William A. Rowe, Jr.]

Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 11:14 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin
> <robertburrelldonkin@...> wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 7:55 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
>>  <wrowe@...> wrote:
>>  > Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>>  >
>>  > > I've wasted too much time today on the stupid IP Clearance template
>>  > > that insists on asking a bunch of irrelevant questions about
>>  > > decisions that the Incubator is not responsible for making.
>>  > > The required IP clearance questions should be:
>>  > >
>>  > >   Date:
>>  > >   Identify the Contribution:
>>  > >   Identify the Contributor(s):
>>  > >   What are the filenames for the applicable
>>  > >     software grant(s):
>>  > >     Corporate CLA(s):
>>  > >     Individual CLA(s):
>>  > >   Location of initial import:
>>  > >   Destination PMC:
>>  > >
>>  > > That's it.
>>  > >
>>  >
>>  >  One more;
>>  >
>>  >      Determine www.a.o/licenses/exports implications
>>  >      for notifications.
>>  >
>>  >  That's my last crypto audit step, putting that request to all incubator
>>  >  podlings and ensuring this mess is under control moving forwards.  Without
>>  >  adding this as an IP import step, it won't happen.
>>
>>  i've committed a stripped down template and moved the prose into a
>>  guide. this guide is just copy ATM but i'll try to find some time to
>>  tidy it up sometime tomorrow.
>>
>>  feedback on the template appreciated or just jump in with a patch ;-)
>
> after process objections, i've reverted the source and withdraw this
> patch. if anyone wants to pick it up, i've opened  a JIRA.

Thanks Robert, I actually think it was a mistake not to just leave things
be.  But given that Sam's volunteered his committee to take this on and
asked that you back it out, I'm sure he'll find the volunteer to see it
through.  Be sure to nag [if|when] that doesn't happen.

Bill

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...

[Roy T. Fielding]

On Apr 21, 2008, at 11:55 AM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:

> Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>> I've wasted too much time today on the stupid IP Clearance template
>> that insists on asking a bunch of irrelevant questions about
>> decisions that the Incubator is not responsible for making.
>> The required IP clearance questions should be:
>>    Date:
>>    Identify the Contribution:
>>    Identify the Contributor(s):
>>    What are the filenames for the applicable
>>      software grant(s):
>>      Corporate CLA(s):
>>      Individual CLA(s):
>>    Location of initial import:
>>    Destination PMC:
>> That's it.
>
> One more;
>
>      Determine www.a.o/licenses/exports implications
>      for notifications.

No.  That is not part of IP clearance, sorry, and I will not repeat all
of the process associated with being a chair within something as trivial
as a secretarial function (connecting the dots between the legal  
paperwork
and import).  We have better places to document the role of a chair.

Robert's separation of guide and template was a good start, though my
version of the template is much smaller.  This is not a legal document.
This is, at most, a secretarial function that is being done so that
we have a place to look for dotted i's and crossed t's.

....Roy


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...

[robert burrell donkin-2]

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 8:04 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
<wrowe@...> wrote:

>
> Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 11:14 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin
> > <robertburrelldonkin@...> wrote:
> >
> > > On Mon, Apr 21, 2008 at 7:55 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
> > >  <wrowe@...> wrote:
> > >  > Roy T. Fielding wrote:
> > >  >
> > >  > > I've wasted too much time today on the stupid IP Clearance template
> > >  > > that insists on asking a bunch of irrelevant questions about
> > >  > > decisions that the Incubator is not responsible for making.
> > >  > > The required IP clearance questions should be:
> > >  > >
> > >  > >   Date:
> > >  > >   Identify the Contribution:
> > >  > >   Identify the Contributor(s):
> > >  > >   What are the filenames for the applicable
> > >  > >     software grant(s):
> > >  > >     Corporate CLA(s):
> > >  > >     Individual CLA(s):
> > >  > >   Location of initial import:
> > >  > >   Destination PMC:
> > >  > >
> > >  > > That's it.
> > >  > >
> > >  >
> > >  >  One more;
> > >  >
> > >  >      Determine www.a.o/licenses/exports implications
> > >  >      for notifications.
> > >  >
> > >  >  That's my last crypto audit step, putting that request to all
> incubator
> > >  >  podlings and ensuring this mess is under control moving forwards.
> Without
> > >  >  adding this as an IP import step, it won't happen.
> > >
> > >  i've committed a stripped down template and moved the prose into a
> > >  guide. this guide is just copy ATM but i'll try to find some time to
> > >  tidy it up sometime tomorrow.
> > >
> > >  feedback on the template appreciated or just jump in with a patch ;-)
> > >
> >
> > after process objections, i've reverted the source and withdraw this
> > patch. if anyone wants to pick it up, i've opened  a JIRA.
> >
>
>  Thanks Robert, I actually think it was a mistake not to just leave things
>  be.

roy's right: the form's filled with rubbish that isn't checked or
enforced by the incubator. it doesn't work as an educational document
either.

> But given that Sam's volunteered his committee to take this on

he has?

>  and asked that you back it out,

i've checked my mail and i can find nothing in my inbox

> I'm sure he'll find the volunteer to see it
> through.

same people, different hats

- robert

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...

[robert burrell donkin-2]

On Wed, Apr 23, 2008 at 9:13 PM, Roy T. Fielding <fielding@...> wrote:

<snip>

>  Robert's separation of guide and template was a good start, though my
>  version of the template is much smaller.

IMHO the only way that documentation gets written here is by first
draft then collective improvement

> This is not a legal document.
> This is, at most, a secretarial function that is being done so that
>  we have a place to look for dotted i's and crossed t's.

+1

- robert

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@...
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@...

[William A. Rowe, Jr.]

Roy T. Fielding wrote:
>> One more;
>>
>>      Determine www.a.o/licenses/exports implications
&g