Read this for a:
- review of what has happened with OSGeo iccubation and why/where we are stuck
- New idea - we should just update the headers for the next release
- New idea - we should create a PMC list
zool: i don't mean to be thrashing through stale water, only what with
all the past comms problems i dont know what is common knowledge and
what is not...
acuster: and we are all very sorry that this was too much of a struggle
jgarnett: yawn; it has been so long cameron that a summary would do
jgarnett: I think it was more that Frank felt a conflict
***acuster will undertake a summary
jgarnett: he held the legal purse strings
jgarnett: but was also mentoring us.
acuster: (wohoo! a clean geotools with tests and all)
CameronShorter: Thanks acuster, that will help me with any OSGeo
lobbying I need to do.
hobu n=hobu@osgeo/member/hobu entered the room.
CameronShorter: Is there a PSC email list?
CameronShorter: Or list of PSC members?
seven: Ah. Get one going.
aaime: so far PMC has been working completely in the open
seven: Open public maling list.
CameronShorter: If legals have been advicing PSC to be secretive, then
I'd like to be able to talk to the PSC secretively until we can reverse
aaime: Frankly I don't know what the legals advice has been
acuster: CameronShorter, i don't think that advice was real. Maybe jody
is thinking of something else
jgarnett: contacted you offline
jpfiset left the room (quit: ).
jgarnett: the adivce to work offlne was for one issue.
CameronShorter: Right, jody explained to me offline.
jgarnett: as long as the PMC have an understanding about that issue
jgarnett: I think we can do everything else in the open.
jgarnett: if any PMC is feeling out of the loop please IM me
CameronShorter: I'd like to discuss it with the PSC (probably via email
CameronShorter: not archieved.
CameronShorter: Ok, so actions here are:
CameronShorter: acuster to write a wiki of issues.
***seven asks whether you are still looking for a board member to do
anything here? Else I will just lurk on.
CameronShorter: Cameron to read up on legals to be sent to me by acuster.
jgarnett: seven I would like to talk to the board
jgarnett: next time you have a meeting
seven: Nov 2nd
jgarnett: I would like to make sure that this is expressed as a
jgarnett: rather than "please fund legal advice"
CameronShorter: The wiki should include a list of steps to graduation.
desruisseaux: I would really like to stay for this discussion because
I'm very interrested in OSGEO, but I really have to leave now otherwise
I will be stick outside. Many thanks to Cameron, as well as Adrian and
Jody for taking care of this important issue. Bye all
desruisseaux left the room (quit: "ChatZilla 0.9.78.1 [Firefox
jgarnett: does OSGeo have a charter now?
CameronShorter: Is this a weekly meeting timeslop?
jgarnett: a charter
seven: jgarnett: Sure we have.
acuster: CameronShorter, yes, we are twenty minutes over
jgarnett: a why and what of what the foundation does
jgarnett: where; no link on the website
***seven looks for it
CameronShorter: Ok, I can turn up at NOW-45mins next week.
CameronShorter: 05:30 for me.
***seven first adds Joda wants to talk to the board of Jedi.
aaime: ha ha
aaime: we are mixing star wards and star trek voyager here
jgarnett: thanks for waking up early cameron
acuster: groldan, here?
acuster: groldan, do you set M2_REPO in eclipse?
aaime: yes, we usually set it by hand
CameronShorter: jgarnett, can you please email me list of PSC email
jgarnett: on the wiki (in the developers guide!)
aaime: (there is another mvn something that creates a workspace with
that one already set, but I find it quicker to do it by hand)
jgarnett: anyone logging this meeting?
seven: Hrmpf. Are you not logged yet?
groldan: acuster: yes, sorry. I've set M2_REPO
acuster: our bot is missing these days
seven: If you want to have it logged automatically just let gary sherman
***acuster has logs though
groldan: I've lost part of the meeting, so can't post
acuster: seven, the whole channel? That would be cool
jgarnett: acuster do you want to post? or should I?
seven: Sure. http://logs.qgis.org/
acuster: go ahead if you have bandwidth
CameronShorter: If you set up a reliable bot for #geotools, could you
please set one up for #mapbuilder too.
CameronShorter: the #mapbuilder bot keeps falling over.
jgarnett: I found the section of the OSGeo bylaws that covers what we
needed "To further the goals of the corporation and to ensure that the
assets of the corporation are utilized for public benefit, all software
whose development is managed by the corporation shall be released under
a software license that is designated by the Open Source Initiative
(OSI) as one that satisfies the OSI's requirements for Certified Open
aaime: the gt2 one is dead too
jgarnett: not sure that bylaws have legal weight...
jgarnett: but we can always trust!
CameronShorter: I can't see anything wrong with the above bylaw. Am I
jgarnett: it is a bylaw
jgarnett: ie a rule that the foundation uses to manage itself
jgarnett: not a organizational charter
***seven wonders whether she missed something. What was the point? Maybe
you could let me know the link to the log of thsi chat to help me
jgarnett: ie the only thing it can do is kick members out of the foundation
jgarnett: (like a professional organization)
jgarnett: I am posting now; but most of the "chat" happened over a year ago
CameronShorter: Jody, I still can't see why that effects geotools?
jgarnett: basically we are developers; asking the foundation how to go
about putting a (c) on our code
jgarnett: the trick is the (c) says "Open Source Geospatial Foundation"
jgarnett: and hense we need the foundation board to dictate the terms
acuster: s/says/will say
jgarnett: and since we are the first project to do this
jgarnett: nobody has any clue.
seven: Oh, I have clues. Loads of them.
jgarnett: The initial cut was a "code contribution" agreement; but we
did not understand it.
jgarnett: (ie it was one sided and said what we the developers were
giving up when we contributed code)
seven: Problem is we do not share he same clued yet.
jgarnett: we were later told that the other half of the agreement; ie to
make the code available as open source
***seven corrects: Problem is that we do not share the same clues yet.
jgarnett: was to be in the charter
seven: Ah, OK.
jgarnett: but by then 6 months had gone by and it was too late.
seven: But there is an easy solution to this.,
jgarnett: in the mean time acuster found different legal document /
***acuster watches jgarnett open old wounds
jgarnett: in which both parties; code contributor and OSGeo foundation
seven: Whenever the OSGeo does someting wrong there is always
thpossibility to branch code.
jgarnett: write down what they are about.
jgarnett: this phreaked the osgeo legal council out
jgarnett: so in addition to old and new wounds
jgarnett: (mostly for acuster and frank)
seven: So what you are really talking about is the project itfself.
Community, name, etc. Branding.
jgarnett: we are gradually communicating
jgarnett: but only every 6 months
jgarnett: seven we are only talking about code (c)
jgarnett: and the header on our files
seven: Oh come on.
seven: Just do it.
jgarnett: the sad part is that
seven: I cannot believe it.
jgarnett: we express things in terms of "legal help please"
seven: Be happy.
jgarnett: rather than "Talk to us please"
CameronShorter: Ok, these blocking issues "OSGeo changing charter" need
to be listed in our wiki work off plan so everyone can see where we are
stumbling. First we find the bug, then we can fix it.
seven: It is much easier.
jgarnett: so it becomes a funding question by the time the board see it
jgarnett: which was not our intention.
seven: Thank you.
jgarnett: seven we are happy; but we are also not making much progress.
seven: I can see that.
jgarnett: seven we could just do it; but we are trying to a) be a good
origional member project and figure it out for others later b) be kind
to osgeo board and not too pushy
acuster: jody, i thought we had solved all these problems
jgarnett: acuster I was doing the review
seven: So all the problems have been discussed. Then we can go on and do
jgarnett: I still have not heard back on where the board is at;
seven: From what I gather that will be the 2. Nov.
jgarnett: sounds good.
jgarnett: IRC meeting? or conference call ...
acuster: OSGEO NEEDS A COPYRIGHT ASSIGNMENT DOCUMENT — that is all
seven: The board thinks that you made great progress and is eager to do
whatever is required to get you through the process.
acuster: how do we get one?
CameronShorter: I'm guessing from all the extra information that keeps
coming out, that the first cut at the wiki will only be a start. And
lots of extra issues are going to creep into the work off issues/plan.
seven: There is no budget for legal advice by a paid for laywer (yet) -
(i.e. the board does not see the need to employ one to solve this problem)
acuster: does the board not see 'getting a copyright assignment form" as
seven: Maybe the board is still ignorant to the dimension of the problem
to the GeoTools project.
jgarnett: well the board has had two people on it familiar with the issue
jgarnett: Chris Holmes
jgarnett: and Frank
seven: From the board's perspective it does look a little like an
artificial problem (that the pure pragmatic Frank failed upon).
acuster: geotools would like to have a copyright assignment form so
developers could assign copyright to OSGeo
seven: that 'even' the pure pragmatic Frank failed upon...
acuster: seven, it would be nice if the board told us that
CameronShorter: Seven, sounds like it. Lets get all the issues out in
the open. So we can see the blocking issues.
acuster: what's the artificial nature of the problem?
seven: acuster: Take my word for the board's opinion for the time being.
***acuster is trying to understand
acuster: what's the "artificial" part?
seven: Whenever it is my personal opinion I will indicate that.
acuster: does the board feel it has a copyright assignment document?
***seven is a little slow, giev her some time - and sorry to be late to
jgarnett: Or does it feel we should just pick up any document from the
jgarnett: seven; this communication here is exactly what we have been
acuster: jgarnett, OSI has documents?
seven: Yes, the board thinks that if you change the copyright in the
code to "OSGeo" (+ add some formal text, we have to look where that is now)
jgarnett: They at least have one document; this list of OSI approved
seven: Oh? Are you still looking for what license to choose?
jgarnett: cool; so the missing part seven is which body has the mandiate
jgarnett: ie is OSGeo going to produce this (c) header; and code
seven: I thought you were stuck on GNU LGPL?
acuster: seven, can you repeat that please? your last was not a formal
sentence: "the board thinks..."
jgarnett: or is the GeoTools PMC going to produce it
jgarnett: and OSGeo live with it?
acuster: seven we have a preferred license, indeed lgpl
seven: Cool. Kepp it.
seven: Keep it, ...
jgarnett: and what we don't have is a code contribution agreement (am I
right acuster? or do we have one now?)
seven: Q: You do want to have a cla that developers physically sign.
Sort of perform the "legal ritual".
acuster: we have no documents which (1) assert the contributions are
legal (2) assert the contributor wishes their code to be contributed (3)
assigns formal copyright (not a license) to anyone
jgarnett: acuster this is fun; I am glad I took the year off. Thanks for
taking the wounds.
seven: Add some ? please to the above
jgarnett: seven we were told that we had to do the legal ritual;
jgarnett: and send the documents to frank for safe keeping.
seven: Who did?
acuster: seven: yes, we hope to have a formal document each contributor
jgarnett: Frank told us that.
jgarnett: from the board.
***seven tries to think back when this was required by anybody?
acuster: seven: we hope that the bulk of the code could thereby become
formally copyright by OSGeo
CameronShorter: Jody, Mapbuilder doesn't get CLA from developers.
jgarnett: seven I have some email with the osgeo legal represenative
seven: That one.
acuster: seven: enough so that OSGeo could re-license in the future and
represent our interests in a legal forum
jgarnett: who is Mapbuilder? ie do indivudals hold (c), is Mapbuilder
incoroperated in the states? etc...
seven: acuster: Very good.
CameronShorter: Mapbuilder is owned by contributors.
jgarnett: and GeoTools woudl be owned by OSGeo foundation
jgarnett: hense the difference
***seven cringes, MapBuilder obviously has the same issue...
acuster: seven: does the board feel it has such a document?
jgarnett: acuster++ points for persistence!
CameronShorter: Mapbuilder didn't get a legal review, despite our
requests for it.
acuster: jgarnett, correction Geotools would be a mix of (c) OSGeo and
jgarnett: actuall seven++ points for persistence as well (thanks so much
for this discussion)
acuster: jgarnett, because some have indicated they will not sign a
document in any form
jgarnett: acuster I think for that code we will need to cut it out of
jgarnett: or rewrite it
seven: Well. Up to now the board never really had the need to wave a
document (you know, kind of a piece of white paper with silly signs on
them) at people.
acuster: jgarnett, we presume that the bulk will be (c) OSGeo and
therefore be sufficient for the legal needs
jgarnett: (sad but true; I already removed a lot of code during the
seven: acuster: ++1
seven: jgarnett: Good. Slim code base is sexy.
acuster: seven, does this appear absurd as a setup?
CameronShorter: There was a strong arguement by Eric Raymond (ESR) ~ 1
year ago that CLAs are not required (although not tested in court)
acuster: seven, the board indicated, by producing an earlier draft of a
copyright licensing agreement, that it wished to allow projects to set
themselves up in this way. Is this still true?
seven: Don't be sorry, everything fine.
acuster: s/copyright licensing agreement/copyright assignment
acuster: they are completely different things
CameronShorter: Autodesk lawyer disagreed with ESR, but I understand
that OSGeo went with ESR's advice.
jgarnett: that is news to me
jgarnett: perhaps I should read the board meetings
seven: We are not talking to an Autodesk lawyer at this moment.
acuster: note to all we are discussing Copyright assignment NOT
jgarnett: okay; understood
seven: acuster: +1
seven: OK. Slowly please, for an old girl. I ask questions, you answer.
acuster: so seven, you said earlier that the board felt geotools was
being unreasonable. could you flesh that out please?
seven: You (every developer that goes into code and edits the copyright
in the header) assigns OSGeo as copyright holder.
seven: acuster: later
seven: Thats it.
groldan left the room (quit: Remote closed the connection).
seven: Where is your problem?
acuster: how do we do that?
acuster: how does a user of geotools show their client that that is the
seven: Well, use your editor, open the code file, change the text in the
(c) and save the fiule. Commit.
seven: Whenn all files are committed you pass incubation.
acuster: Wedogis is a small company bidding on a big european contract.
How to they show that the code is legit?
seven: They say that OSGeo say it does.
acuster: the answer, up until today, has always been: let's make a
series of letters documenting the intent of all the developers
seven: That is why we are a founfation
acuster: which is what we have been working on for a year and half
acuster: it is also the original intent of the first documents OSGeo put out
seven: I am very proud of you.
seven: This is really good.
acuster: does OSGeo not find that a reasonable solution?
seven: I am sorry that we have caused so much trouble.
jgarnett: So for the next release we could ask module maintainers; to:
jgarnett: a) check their headers
seven: Yes, sure. We do it taht way.
jgarnett: b) update their headers to (c) OSGeo
acuster: Formal letters are par for the course in most other foundations
acuster: FSF, etc.
seven: Good for most other foundations. Do we need it?
acuster: yes, I think we do
seven: Then we do it.
jgarnett: I think that is up to the board to decide
acuster: because being lazy now is easy. but getting sued is easy too
jgarnett: (ie I do not want to tell the board what to do on this one)
acuster: and I expect to be sued
jgarnett: well we got one take down notice before based on a patent
acuster: because we are tackling a 2billion dollar buisness
jgarnett: (some magnifying glass thing)
seven: Cool. This is becoming interesting now.
jgarnett: we removed it.
acuster: so having a squeaky clean legal trail has real advantages
jgarnett: We also removed all previous geoserver downloads; because they
included an ESRI jar
acuster: this was, two years ago, the main argument for joining osgeo
jgarnett: so we do take this stuff seriously
seven: Do you remeber the Keynote by Damian?
jgarnett: I missed it
CameronShorter: acuster, I think we can avoid Contributor Lisence
Agreement (CLA) if you so desire.
jgarnett: and acuster was not there.
jgarnett: is there a video of it online?
acuster: CameronShorter, no I don't desire. I have been working for over
a year writing a Copyright Assignment document
acuster: CameronShorter, because I think it's really, really important
acuster: I am amazed to hear the Board is so blasé about this
seven: jgarnett: no but i will comment it in the Wiki some day.
seven: Hehe, I just checked. See how ignorant I am of many things.
***seven is amazed at the complexity of human behaviour.
seven: I need to go now.
acuster: jgarnett, couldn't we assign (c) to FSF eu instead?
seven: Can we create a PSC mailing list and continue there?
jgarnett: interesting discussion; thanks to both of you
jgarnett: do we want to punt this conversation onto the wiki for later?
CameronShorter: I need to go, I'll be reading custer's issues/work off
plan with interest and will provide feedback. I think the work off plan
with actions assigned to people will help fix this.
jgarnett: we tend to use geotools-devel
seven: Yes please.
jgarnett: because our PMC is really just a front for the module maintainers
seven: geotools.devel is too crowded for this.
jgarnett: (ie PMC is just volunteers; module maintainers do the work and
have the responsibility)
seven: You should consider having a PSC
seven: just four people you trust
seven: or five
***acuster is just totally confused
jgarnett: that is what the PMC is
seven: acuster: I am sorry.
jgarnett: ie 5 people who have volunteered so much they are recognized
seven: Do you have a mailing list?
***seven is insitent.
jgarnett: but I can create one
seven: You can also ask Tyler to make one.
acuster: don't go and create some random mail list for three emails
seven: Will be good for formal and legal talk
jgarnett: seven has a point
seven: when we can point people to an OSGeo lmailing list
jgarnett: we often lose PMC communication in the raw development stream
that is geotools-devel
acuster: as you wish
CameronShorter: +1 for a PSC email list.
seven: I promise that I will tent to things in a weekly manner if I
don't have ot filter out 95% developer noise.
jgarnett: what we can do is make the list public; since we are keen on
jgarnett: I will ask the geotools-devel list first
***seven wonders whether she has actually been of any help. If not just
acuster: if you are accurately representing the board, it's very helpful
acuster: distressing but helpful
jgarnett: guys I need to get back to the bump and grind of development fun
seven: acuster: I will make sure that I communicate with the board
sufficiently to accurately represent it in this discussion.
jgarnett: acuter I will be on #udig to chat
seven: Have fun. Thank you.
jgarnett: (if you have any awake left for uDig)
jgarnett: I will package up this chat for the geotools wiki