From: Michael Dolan <mdolan@linuxfoundation.org>
To: Francois Ozog <francois.ozog@linaro.org>
Cc: Dave Neary <dneary@redhat.com>,
"O'Driscoll, Tim" <tim.odriscoll@intel.com>,
"moving@dpdk.org" <moving@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, November 29th
Date: Thu, 1 Dec 2016 14:44:32 -0500 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <CAFV=PSF3jGoz8cmuf1_3_HVZRk4ovCNr2yK6EpFFkC_c0MSNAw@mail.gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAHFG_=UzcianJfFp-221m5kXtTfZY1SSzu8HwYde25whFmAeiw@mail.gmail.com>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3099 bytes --]
Can we setup a call next week with the counsel for the major contributors?
If it's 7-9 companies this shouldn't be difficult to resolve. I hate to be
difficult but this topic will not be resolved on a public mailing list
unless everyone is willing to punt on the issue until there is a governing
board to make the decision.
I am willing to schedule and host the call. I just need the names and
emails of your counsel. Please email me directly and not on the list.
Thanks,
Mike
---
Mike Dolan
VP of Strategic Programs
The Linux Foundation
Office: +1.330.460.3250 Cell: +1.440.552.5322 Skype: michaelkdolan
mdolan@linuxfoundation.org
---
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:09 PM, Francois Ozog <francois.ozog@linaro.org>
wrote:
> Hello,
>
> please find the Linaro CLA that passed many large companies lawyers for
> IP: http://opendataplane.org/contributor/individual/
>
> Compnies that already signed it (not all are listed): ARM, Broadcom,
> Canonical, Cavium, Cisco, Comcast, Ericsson, ENEA, Facebook, Hisilicon, HP
> Enterprise, Huawei, MontaVista, Nokia, NXP, Qualcomm, RedHat, Samsung,
> Socionext, Spreadtrum, ST microelectronics, Texas Instruments, Wind River,
> ZTE
>
> I wonder how to read "Need for a CLA is a problem for some contributors
> due to the need to get legal approval."
>
> Is it: "let's mask the problem to lawyers because they may NOT allow us to
> continue our technical fun?" or is it "this is just a burden that may take
> long and I don't want to lose time".
>
> Cordially,
>
> FF
>
> On 1 December 2016 at 19:50, Dave Neary <dneary@redhat.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 12/01/2016 01:41 PM, Dave Neary wrote:
>> >> Note that I’m assuming that the combination of Apache 2 and a CLA
>> isn't an option because this seems redundant as both include patent
>> protection. Maybe there are other reasons that would make this a valid
>> combination though.
>> >
>> > The Apache Software Foundation requires CLAs with copyright assignment
>> > to the foundation for official Apache projects - this is to allow for
>> > future license changes (an Apache v3 license), and also reflects some of
>> > the difficulties of a 30 year old project (several of the original
>> > copyright holders are no longer with the project, or have died, and the
>> > succession rights for copyright materials can sometimes result in
>> > unfortunate conflicts between the estates and open source projects).
>>
>> A small but important correction: The ASF CLA is a grant of a broad
>> copyright license which allows, among other things, the ASF to
>> redistribute the software under a different license. It is not a
>> copyright assignment.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Dave.
>>
>> --
>> Dave Neary - NFV/SDN Community Strategy
>> Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com
>> Ph: +1-978-399-2182 / Cell: +1-978-799-3338
>>
>
>
>
> --
> [image: Linaro] <http://www.linaro.org/>
> François-Frédéric Ozog | *Director Linaro Networking Group*
> T: +33.67221.6485
> francois.ozog@linaro.org | Skype: ffozog
>
>
[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 6327 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-12-01 19:44 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 19+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-11-30 16:01 O'Driscoll, Tim
2016-11-30 17:10 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-11-30 22:08 ` O'Driscoll, Tim
2016-12-01 9:20 ` Thomas Monjalon
2016-12-01 9:40 ` O'Driscoll, Tim
2016-11-30 17:39 ` Michael Dolan
2016-11-30 20:55 ` Dave Neary
2016-12-01 17:40 ` O'Driscoll, Tim
2016-12-01 17:46 ` Ed Warnicke
2016-12-01 18:01 ` Michael Dolan
2016-12-01 18:41 ` Dave Neary
2016-12-01 18:50 ` Dave Neary
2016-12-01 19:09 ` Francois Ozog
2016-12-01 19:44 ` Michael Dolan [this message]
2016-12-01 20:20 ` O'Driscoll, Tim
2016-12-01 20:47 ` Wiles, Keith
2016-12-01 21:33 ` O'Driscoll, Tim
2016-12-02 9:00 ` Francois Ozog
2016-12-01 20:33 ` O'Driscoll, Tim
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to='CAFV=PSF3jGoz8cmuf1_3_HVZRk4ovCNr2yK6EpFFkC_c0MSNAw@mail.gmail.com' \
--to=mdolan@linuxfoundation.org \
--cc=dneary@redhat.com \
--cc=francois.ozog@linaro.org \
--cc=moving@dpdk.org \
--cc=tim.odriscoll@intel.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).