On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 3:37 PM, Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 3:22 PM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hey all, > > > > On the following page: > > http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/ip-clearance-template.html > > > > The process steps do not align with the intent described in the Preamble, > > and some steps are not required. Specifically, steps 5, 7, and 8. > > > > Step 5: the code will be imported *somewhere*; there is no reason for it > to > > be duplicated into the Incubator repository. The ASF simply requires > > paperwork to acknowledge the propriety of that import, wherever it may > be. > > There isn't even a reason for a checksum. > > > > Step 7: the Incubator has no prerogative over what the VP of an Apache > > project does (or other Officers, for that matter). If a TLP wants some > > code, then they can do so. And the representative of that TLP (the VP, an > > Officer) is the one taking responsibility for their actions. The > Incubator > > has been a recording area, but that doesn't give it discretion over other > > projects. > > [ IMO, the recording should go somewhere identified by VP Legal Affairs, > > and be entirely disconnected from the Incubator ] > > Just some historical perspective (from the previous VP Legal Affairs, > though this predates my having that role), IP clearance is something > that is rarely done on a PMC level so it is something that most > individual PMCs don't have much experience with; at a foundation level > it is done frequently and primarily by the incubator. Hence the VP of > Legal Affairs (my predecessor and then unchanged by myself) designated > that the Incubator have this role. > > > Step 8: moot, once (7) is removed. > > > > I'd like to modify the steps to reflect the above points. > > > > Thoughts? > > As far as I can tell, it has been working without issue, where lazy > consensus is key to making it work smoothly. So I'm -1 on fixing > something that isn't broke. > It *is* broken. An Officer of the corporation should not be subject to the will of the IPMC. Gavin asked me how TLPs can import code, and I noted the IP clearance process. I looked at it, and found it to be wrong. Whichever TLP he was referring to should not be posting to general@. They should "file the paperwork" and call it done. I will even tell them to ignore those steps. If/when I ever do it with an Officer hat on, I'll ignore those steps. My point is to make the document reflect the reality of our organization. Cheers, -g
