Good questions, I have asked the grantor about that one source file.
Maybe incubator folks with more experience can help answer these questions.
1) Regarding the package matching the grant. The code base granted was
not going to pass IP clearance. It needed headers and a proper LICENSE
and NOTICE. I was given authority by the grantor to update headers. I
took the granted software, added headers, threw out a few files (with the
grantor's permission) I found while doing so that would not pass IP
clearance and presented that package for review. Folks with more
experience: is this a correct procedure or should I have proceeded some
other way?
2) Regarding icons. The icons in question are common and trivial (">" and
">>" for 'more' and 'lots more', down arrow, etc). My scanners did not
pick up any copyright notices in those files. Folks with more experience:
Does the grantor need to provide proof-positive in order to get clearance,
or do we trust the provenance if there is no evidence to the contrary?
3) Is there a restriction agains PSD files? We have some checked into SVN
for our website already.
4) Is the grantor of a code base required to do pre-donation scrubbing in
public? Every Adobe donation I worked on was scrubbed internally then a
grant was submitted and a package submitted for IP clearance. I would
think many grantors would not want to have the scrub public as early
scrubs could end up naming names or discovering potentially embarrassing
mis-use of IP.
Thanks,
-Alex
On 8/21/14 8:43 PM, "Justin Mclean" <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>Mostly good but -1 (binding) as it still needs a little more clean up
>
>First off the code in bundle for IP clearance doesn't match what is
>recorded in the grant. The grant specifies this [1]. Not sure if this is
>a major issue or not but I expected them to be the same.
>
>While the Github repo only has one user, some of the code varies in style
>which may indicate that the code came from multiple people/sources and is
>of unknown licence. For example concatenateMetaDataXMLItems in
>ClasSUtils.as in com.flexcapacitor.utils. A quick google search turns up
>the same code here [2] which a) predates the code being in the github
>repo and may of been where the code may of came from. Of course not easy
>to tell but this at least needs confirmation that this is not an issue.
>I notice that this file may incorrectly have an Apache licence header but
>they depends on the license of the code in question. In the same file I
>also see isSimple which looks like it was copied from the Flex SDK (not
>an issue just an observation) but could also indicate that source in this
>file has come from various different places. I only checked a couple of
>methods in that file and only a few likely files so there may be other
>files/methods with similar issues in the donation.
>
>Solution is to get the donor to double check that all code was written by
>then and/or has a compatible licence, in particular when the style is
>different.
>
>There are also possibly some icons than may have non compatatble licences
>in there. I'm not aware of the original license of the icons but as most
>icons have been blacked out I assume that it was a non compatible one.
>
>Here are some of the non blacked out ones. I may of missed some.
>
>./Radii8Remote/src/assets/icons/down_disclosure.png
>./Radii8Remote/src/assets/icons/down_disclosure2.png
>./Radii8LibraryAssets/src/assets/icons/effects/divider_vertical.png
>./Radii8Remote/src/assets/icons/down_disclosure2.png
>./Radii8Remote/src/assets/icons/more.png
>./Radii8Remote/src/assets/icons/more2.png
>./Radii8LibraryAssets/src/assets/icons/effects/playhead_light.png
>./Radii8LibraryAssets/src/assets/icons/effects/playhead.png
>
>Easy solution is to black out these files - assuming they have an
>incompatible licence that is.
>
>A minor issue may exist with the binary file PortraitMode.psd. Does this
>need to be a photoshop file or can it be converted to a different format?
>If not are we OK with photoshop files in the repo?
>
>I'll also note that these issues could of been fixed before bringing it
>to the incubator if the Flex PMC rather than a single person had been
>involved in grant process.
>
>Thanks,
>Justin
>
>1 https://github.com/monkeypunch3/Radii8/tree/ApacheFlexRelease1.0
>2. http://pastebin.com/b5zPNGWF
>
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
