[GRASS-PSC] Request: CVS Write Access to Serena Pallecchi

[Markus Neteler]

On 11/22/06, Frank Warmerdam <warmerdam at pobox.com> wrote:
> Markus Neteler wrote:
> > Dear PSC,
> >
> > since we have established this steering committee, I'll make
> > the first CVS write access request in this forum.
> >
> > If there are no objections, I would like to grant write
> > access to Serena Pallecchi (pallecch*cli.di.unipi it) who
> > is maintainer of the new r.li suite. I just submitted
> > a bunch of changes from here to r.li and activated the
> > module in raster/Makefile since most problems are now
> > solved.
> >
> > I don't think that we need a formal vote, but please speak
> > up in case of objections.
>
> Markus,
>
> I have skimmed the http://grass.itc.it/devel/index.php page, and
> the SUBMITTING file, and I don't find any discussion of what GRASS
> code commiter responsibilities are with regard to vetting code
> submissions for legality.
>
> I'd like to suggest that the GRASS PSC consider extending the SUBMITTING
> file with a section on this topic and making part of the commiter approval
> process requesting that the potential commiter review that information.
> The text I use for GDAL appears under Legal in the document at:
>
>    http://www.gdal.org/rfc3_commiters.html
>
> I also think that approving commiters is one of the more important things
> that the PSC does, and that each ought to be formally voted on.  If you
> find your voting process is too cumbersome to handle this quickly, then
> perhaps you have set yourself too long a voting period!

Frank, PSC,

thanks for your feedback. I agree that we should define the legal part
in our SUBMITTING (or separate) document. The last years it worked
pretty well, but I think that with a growing group of developers (finally!)
we need to flesh out some rules.

I have now used the "Legal" section of
http://www.gdal.org/rfc3_commiters.html
and drafted a text for us, see attachment. Please (all) comment.

Markus
-------------- next part --------------
Legal

GRASS developers have to keep the code base clear of improperly
contributed code. It is important to the GRASS users, developers and
the OSGeo foundation to avoid contributing any code to the project
without it being clearly licensed under the project license or a
compliant license. The committer below is understood as developer with
write access to the GRASS source code repository.

Generally speaking, the key issues are that those individuals
providing code to be included in the GRASS repository understand that
the code will be released under the GPL >=2 license, and that the
person providing the code has the right to contribute the code. For
the committer themselves understanding about the license needs to be
clear. When committing 3rd party contributions, the committer should
verify the understanding unless the committer is very comfortable that
the contributor understands the license (for instance frequent
contributors).

If the contribution was developed on behalf of an employer (on work
time, as part of a work project, etc) then it is important that an
appropriate representative of the employer understand that the code
will be contributed under the GPL license. The arrangement should be
cleared with an authorized supervisor/manager, etc.

The code should be developed by the contributor, or the code should be
from a source which can be rightfully contributed such as from the
public domain, or from an open source project under a compatible
license.

All unusual situations need to be discussed and/or documented.

Committers should adhere to the following guidelines, and may be
personally legally liable for improperly contributing code to the
source repository:

* Make sure the contributor (and possibly employer) is aware of the
  contribution terms.

* Code coming from a source other than the contributor (such as
  adapted from another project) should be clearly marked as to the
  original source, copyright holders, license terms and so forth. This
  information can be in the file headers, but should also be added to
  the project licensing file if not exactly matching normal project
  licensing (grass/COPYRIGHT.txt).

* Existing copyright headers and license text should never be stripped
  from a file. If a copyright holder wishes to give up copyright they
  must do so in writing to the GRASS-PSC before copyright messages
  are removed. If license terms are changed, it has to be by agreement
  (written in email is ok) of the copyright holders.

* When substantial contributions are added to a file (such as
  substantial patches) the author/contributor should be added to the
  list of copyright holders for the file in the file header.

* If there is uncertainty about whether a change it proper to
  contribute to the code base, please seek more information from the
  project steering committee, other GRASS developers or the OSGeo
  foundation legal counsel.