[Board] osgeo code contribution agreement

[Mattmann, Chris A (388J)]

Hey Guys,

If you guys are simply reusing the Apache agreement, why not simply suggest that OSGeo establish a formal collaboration with the ASF? Or, if that's too broad, fine, but something work thinking about at least at the project level (aka GeoTools?)

Cheers,
Chris

From: Jody Garnett <jody.garnett at gmail.com<mailto:jody.garnett at gmail.com>>
Date: Saturday, February 2, 2013 5:26 PM
To: "board at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:board at lists.osgeo.org>" <board at lists.osgeo.org<mailto:board at lists.osgeo.org>>
Subject: [Board] osgeo code contribution agreement

The GeoTools project has had some feedback about our code contribution agreement, along with the recommendation that we go for a standard one (such as apache).

To that end I have prepared the following:
- http://docs.codehaus.org/display/GEOTOOLS/Replace+Contribution+Agreement

The amusing thing is, that by starting from the Apache agreement, it comes out as a straight up "OSGeo Code Contribution Agreement" with nothing GeoTools specific.

I had a couple questions:

Q: Is there a good contact point for "osgeo"?

The website has info at osgeo.org<mailto:info at osgeo.org> (which I assume is an alias). I have assumed we can set up a secretary at osgeo.org<mailto:secretary at osgeo.org> email address and alias it to the correct individual.

Q: Do we have a fax number?

I have assumed not, and limited submissions to email and snail mail

I will be bouncing this proposal off the GeoTools PMC (after updating with your feedback). And it should be returned to you as a request in due course.

--
Jody Garnett

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/board/attachments/20130203/d10c0dc8/attachment.htm>