Dear Kranti, > On Feb 5, 2025, at 07:32, Kranti Parisa <kranti.par...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Thanks Craig, we're super excited to join the Apache family. Please find > the answers to your questions below > > #1 As the creator of Iggy, Piotr Gankiewicz owned the copyright from April > 2023 - Dec 2024. In Jan 2025 the copyright was transferred to LaserData, > Piotr is the Co-founder. Both Piotr and myself have signed the SGAs with > the "Representing" field and sent them over to secretary@ email. Please let > us know if anything else is needed.
Thanks, that information is useful. But the SGA from both Kranti and Piotr have the wrong first page "Licensor". It should be LaserData for both documents. > > #2 Yes, others have contributed to the individual SDK repos. If we are > creating separate repos for SDKs, we can nominate them as committers for > those individual repos. At Apache, we work on trust. So segregating repository permissions should never be necessary, or a reason for multiple repos. It might be useful to discuss with projects that have many different release cycles from a single repo, before making a final decision. > And we also have others being very active in the > community on the Discord channels, contributing to the roadmaps, feature > definitions, architecture choices, implementation ideas etc. We anticipate > them to contribute/commit to the main codebase as well as documentation, > reviewing/merging PRs etc > > #3 We've been brainstorming about a big monolith style repo or keeping the > individual SDKs, docs, benchmarks etc separate from the core server repo. > So that we could maintain different sets of committers, independent and > faster release cycles etc. Different sets of committers for different repos might be more trouble than it is worth. > We've noticed a few examples > like incubator-hugegraph-*, incubator-resilientdb-* etc. If the > recommendation is to limit the repos, we can certainly look into. For this very important decision, I recommend a deep discussion with your community and your Mentors. > > #4 They've signed the Apache ICLAs in anticipation of Apache Incubator > onboarding as going forward all of their contributions will be on Apache > Iggy (Incubating). The copyright owners are as described in #1 above and > SGAs were sent from LaserData already. We have not received most of the ICLAs. Are they perhaps in transit? > > #5 Should we ask all the contributors/proposed initial committers to resend > the ICLAs with "iggy" listed in the *(optional) notify project* field? > We've mentioned the Iggy VOTE Thread in the emails > https://lists.apache.org/thread/s94gt19x0vrgoghxvbshogppkbbro7jw Please let > us know if we it helps to resend them, don't want to spam secretary@ :) There is no need to resend ICLAs simply to add iggy to the documents. But note that accounts will not be created for any of the proposed committers without the ICLAs on file. > > We're learning the Apache Incubator process, thanks for your patience :) Again, welcome aboard, Craig > > Best, > Kranti > > > > On Wed, Feb 5, 2025 at 4:52 AM Craig Russell <apache....@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Congratulations on the successful vote, and welcome to Apache and the >> Incubator. >> >> As we get the project set up, I just have a few questions about the legal >> stuff. >> >> 1. Who actually owns the copyright to the code? Piotr Gankiewicz developed >> the code originally but was ownership transferred to LaserData? Whoever >> owns the copyright should be identified on the first page of the grant >> ("Licensor") and on the second page (Representing). If it is an individual >> then the Title should be "owner". Similarly, there is a grant pending from >> Kranti Parisa, The "Licensor" on this grant needs to be aligned with the >> Representing field. >> >> 2. There are only three or four (I'm not sure whether the bot needs to be >> counted :-) significant contributors to the main repo. I did not have the >> time to look at all dozen repos. Are other contributors/ proposed >> committers mostly involved in the other repos? >> >> 3. The answer to #2 leads me to wonder why there are 12 repos. Unless the >> ultimate objective is to create sub-projects it seems like unnecessary >> complication and might make it harder for others to contribute. Take this >> as a question, not as a suggestion to change it. >> >> 4. Most of the names listed in the proposal have "CLA signed". Since these >> are not recorded in the Apache iclas.txt I assume this means that they have >> signed a LaserData CLA? In this case, does LaserData own the copyright to >> the code, or simply a license? If LaserData actually owns their >> contributions, then a grant from LaserData is recommended. >> >> 5. The process will go much smoother if the ICLA has "iggy" listed as the >> (optional) project. >> >> Good luck, >> Craig >> >> >>> On Feb 3, 2025, at 10:00, Yonik Seeley <yo...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> With 21 +1 votes ( 10 binding and 11 non-binding) and no +-0 or -1 >>> votes, this vote PASSES. >>> https://lists.apache.org/thread/6zfgdjwrzs92h4z4x6b25v1r23g3f5yg >>> >>> Welcome to the ASF Iggy! >>> >>> -Yonik >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >>> >> >> Craig L Russell >> c...@apache.org >> >> Craig L Russell c...@apache.org
