cut the crap

[William A. Rowe, Jr.]

I'm sorry - I had mixed up Noel's comments with Sam (which is not an easy
thing to do once you know them both ;-)

Please don't worry about plugging legal into the loop until you are done.
Then just send a notice to legal-discuss@ with a link to the page.  It's
really that simple, they trust "us" (incubator) to handle these things.

I still think JIRA'izing this is overkill :)

Bill


Noel J. Bergman wrote:

> 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@...
>
>
>

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

[robert burrell donkin-2]

On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 10:31 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr.
<wrowe@...> wrote:

<snip>

>  I still think JIRA'izing this is overkill :)

it's just a way of parking the issue for now

- robert

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

[JAMES Nightly Build System]

Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:

> 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.

It probably embodies both procedure and policy.  And I agree with you, as
indicated by the message to which you replied:

> > 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.

The Legal Committee does not appear to have any concerns over Roy's proposed
changes.

        --- Noel



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

[robert burrell donkin-2]

On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 1:44 PM, Noel J. Bergman <noel@...> wrote:
> Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:
>
>> 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.
>
> It probably embodies both procedure and policy.

ATM it tries to provide guidance, process and policy but comes up short for each

> And I agree with you, as
> indicated by the message to which you replied:
>
>> > 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.
>
> The Legal Committee does not appear to have any concerns over Roy's proposed
> changes.

<legal-hat>
i don't recall being officially asked
</legal-hat>

- robert

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

[robert burrell donkin-2]

On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Robert Burrell Donkin
<robertburrelldonkin@...> wrote:
> On Mon, May 19, 2008 at 1:44 PM, Noel J. Bergman <noel@...> wrote:
>> Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:

<snip>

>>> > 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.
>>
>> The Legal Committee does not appear to have any concerns over Roy's proposed
>> changes.
>
> <legal-hat>
> i don't recall being officially asked
> </legal-hat>

ok

i've proposed that https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INCUBATOR-74
is used to draft up some minimal principles suitable from the
legal-affairs perspective. please feel free to comment or post
improvements...

- robert

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

[JAMES Nightly Build System]

Robert Burrell Donkin wrote:

> Noel J. Bergman wrote:
> > The Legal Committee does not appear to have any concerns over Roy's
proposed
> > changes.
> <legal-hat>
> i don't recall being officially asked
> </legal-hat>

I was referring to

  Message-ID: <3d4032300805181450k74f5679ag34ee314e670c588b@...>

in legal-discuss@.  In any event, you've proposed a process for the change
in another e-mail, and I am satisfied that it addresses my original comment:

> > 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@...

[Henri Yandell]

On Tue, Apr 22, 2008 at 5:21 PM, 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.

Something I've meant to bring up for a while - do we need to get
trademark granting in there?

I'm thinking of when a project joins and retains the name it had
originally. It seems to usually happen with existing Open Source
projects rather than projects which are moving in from private
communities.

Hen

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