[Geoserver-devel] GSIP 186 - Allow for community/extension modules to be contributed without CLA - Please discuss

GeoServer GeoServer Developer
1

Hi,
following up the last december PSC meeting discussion, here is a proposal to relax the CLA requirements
for code contribution, under some specific conditions:

https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-186

Feedback welcomed.

Cheers
Andrea

···

== GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information. == Ing. Andrea Aime @geowolf Technical Lead GeoSolutions S.A.S. Via di Montramito 3/A 55054 Massarosa (LU) phone: +39 0584 962313 fax: +39 0584 1660272 mob: +39 339 8844549 http://www.geo-solutions.it http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it ------------------------------------------------------- Con riferimento alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg. UE 2016/679 - Regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si precisa che ogni circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo contenuto, gli eventuali allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza è riservata al/i solo/i destinatario/i indicati dallo scrivente. Se il messaggio Le è giunto per errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra operazione è illecita. Le sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene notizia. This email is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. We remind that - as provided by European Regulation 2016/679 “GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of this e-mail or the information herein by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify us immediately by telephone or e-mail.

2

So the background motivation is that “this sometimes limits contributions the project can accept” and the price to pay is possibly opening a can of worms in terms of revisions and acceptance of pull requests.

Wonder, are there any precedents for contributions that couldn’t be accepted due to lack of a singed CLA? How were they resolved?

Sorry I missed the discussion so far, but fear in adding even more overhead to the already very limited resources the project has.

I’m under the impression, and this might be just me, that the project is already too permissive to incorporate content to its codebase under the community modules space. That might have been nice in the svn days, but with git anyone can have their unsupported geoserver plugins elsewhere and still publicly accessible and ready to merge. Or maybe a separate repository could be used for “community” modules? This is just a thought from the perspective that sometimes less is more, and I personally would like the codebase to be as succinct as possible maybe with just the stuff that is “ok”, and think about other alternatives for pure RnD, possibly drop and forget contributions.

···

Gabriel Roldán

3

Thanks Andrea,

Taking feedback here for discussion (rather than editing the page directly):

  1. This practice allows to centralize code ownership on OSGeo, and as a result, on the GeoServer PSC.

Change to “control”, since CLA does not affect “ownership” (or “authorship”).

This practice allows greater control of the GeoServer codebase by OSGeo, and as a result, by the GeoServer PSC.

  1. At the same time, this sometimes limits contributions the project can accept, and there are growing opinions against the concept of CLA itself, see for example …

Changed to highlight author may be unavailable (rather than just unwilling).

At the same time, this sometimes limits code we can include in our project. If the author is unavailable, or unwilling, to grant OSGeo additional permissions. For example …

  1. This proposal aims at relaxing the CLA requirements so that code can be contributed without signing a CLA, under some restrictive conditions that still make it possible for the PSC to retain control of core modules.

Changed to be explicitly just GeoServer license (GPL+EPL excepting) conditions:

This proposal removes the CLA requirements so that code can be contributed to an extension without signing a CLA. The community or extension README will clearly indicate that use of GeoServer LICENSE (GPL w/ EPL library use), and the headers of the files affected will be maintained.

  1. The licence is compatible with the GPL

Modified to say GeoServer LICENSE (we cannot add in any GPL code as we require an exception for with “the EMF, XSD and OSHI Libraries”. This should still work for any extension written with GeoServer in mind, but it does hamper the reuse of random found GPL code on the internet.

  • Explicitly include the GeoServer LICENSE.md file
  • The headers from the original files are maintained, and not updated to indicate (c) OSGeo Foundation.
  • Classes written post-donation can include OSGeo header if all authors have signed CLA
  1. This will influence also pull request review, reviewers will have to verify that code coming from extensions and community modules can indeed be moved, and otherwise reject the request.

Changed as CLA more than covers contributions to these modules.

Pull requests are un-affected as CLA covers the distribution of code by an open source license, and these modules are distributed under the GeoServer GPL License.

Although perhaps you are referencing moving code between these “found-code” extensions/community modules and “core”? If so the files should clearly have a header that does not say OSGeo and thus be easy to check.

Pull requests updating these extensions/community modules are un-affected as our required CLA covers the distribution of code by an open source license. These these extensions/community modules are distributed under the terms of the open source GeoServer GPL License.

Review of pull requests moving code from these extension/community modules should be easy to catch due to use of non OSGeo header.

Q: Would you be willing to call these “found-code extension” or “found-code community module” just to have a quick way to talk about the difference?

···

–
Jody Garnett

4

So the background motivation is that “this sometimes limits contributions the project can accept” and the price to pay is possibly opening a can of worms in terms of revisions and acceptance of pull requests.

I don’t see the can of worms, just a minor annoyance. The modules without CLA would be few and well marked (moving classes between extensions/community is not very common,
they tend to migrate to the center, towards core, but that’s easy to spot).

Wonder, are there any precedents for contributions that couldn’t be accepted due to lack of a singed CLA? How were they resolved?

Easy, PRs were closed, code did not make it in. GeoTools has two PRs blocked on that too, ElasticSearch and the ArcGIS TPK format reader.
The former is likely going to just die if we don’t relax rules, the latter has already been stuck for months with no sign of going forward.
GeoServer wise, the old GSR module would be a candidate for integration under the relaxed rules, we have been waiting Planet to sign a CLA for it for well over six months (and bit rotting in the meantime).

I’m under the impression, and this might be just me, that the project is already too permissive to incorporate content to its codebase under the community modules space. That might have been nice in the svn days, but with git anyone can have their unsupported geoserver plugins elsewhere and still publicly accessible and ready to merge. Or maybe a separate repository could be used for “community” modules? This is just a thought from the perspective that sometimes less is more, and I personally would like the codebase to be as succinct as possible maybe with just the stuff that is “ok”, and think about other alternatives for pure RnD, possibly drop and forget contributions.

Strongly disagree on having separate repos, that is a recipe for disaster. Just look at the recent module graduations, and the ones in process, like MBStyles, web resource, SLDService, authkey.
Had they been kept in separate repositories, they would have bit rotten to the point of making recovery a difficult task (they all have been in the codebase several years before graduation).
Keeping in here ensures that at least they compile and receive the basic automated refactors during large code sprints.

Others might think differently, but not having a community space would increase both friction for those interested in donating code and those trying to contribute small improvements to it.
Without it, donating and keeping new code that I’m not sure would going to make into extensions or core would become just too hard… and it’s something we do on a regular basis, an important part of our activity in the project.
Some modules stick, other die, that’s life, but the community space makes its handling manageable.

Regards,

···

Andrea Aime == GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information. == Ing. Andrea Aime @geowolf Technical Lead GeoSolutions S.A.S. Via di Montramito 3/A 55054 Massarosa (LU) phone: +39 0584 962313 fax: +39 0584 1660272 mob: +39 339 8844549 http://www.geo-solutions.it http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it ------------------------------------------------------- Con riferimento alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg. UE 2016/679 - Regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si precisa che ogni circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo contenuto, gli eventuali allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza è riservata al/i solo/i destinatario/i indicati dallo scrivente. Se il messaggio Le è giunto per errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra operazione è illecita. Le sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene notizia. This email is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. We remind that - as provided by European Regulation 2016/679 “GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of this e-mail or the information herein by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify us immediately by telephone or e-mail.

5

Hi Jody,
thanks for your feedback.

Your wording uses the past tense, as if you did changes on the page… but none of the edits were applied.
I’ve just applied what I could.

···

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information. == Ing. Andrea Aime @geowolf Technical Lead GeoSolutions S.A.S. Via di Montramito 3/A 55054 Massarosa (LU) phone: +39 0584 962313 fax: +39 0584 1660272 mob: +39 339 8844549 http://www.geo-solutions.it http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it ------------------------------------------------------- Con riferimento alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg. UE 2016/679 - Regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si precisa che ogni circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo contenuto, gli eventuali allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza è riservata al/i solo/i destinatario/i indicati dallo scrivente. Se il messaggio Le è giunto per errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra operazione è illecita. Le sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene notizia. This email is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. We remind that - as provided by European Regulation 2016/679 “GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of this e-mail or the information herein by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify us immediately by telephone or e-mail.

6

On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 at 08:46, Andrea Aime <andrea.aime@anonymised.com> wrote:

On Wed, Jan 22, 2020 at 9:47 PM Gabriel Roldan <gabriel.roldan@anonymised.com> wrote:

So the background motivation is that “this sometimes limits contributions the project can accept” and the price to pay is possibly opening a can of worms in terms of revisions and acceptance of pull requests.

I don’t see the can of worms, just a minor annoyance.

Okay then, thanks for the reply. Having cached up with what’s going on with the elastic search contribution et al, and your reply, I feel less worried about it being a major annoyance.

Roger on the sentiment the community space is most useful as it is, you gotta know better than anyone after all.
Cheers,
Gabriel

7

Sorry I was tired, I am proposing changes on this email thread as I want to get the words right, as an example “found code” not working for you to communicate these community / extensions modules. Any other ideas for a “catchy name” …

Missing from this was my personal feedback:

  • For everything written as a GeoServer extension I believe the approach you outline will work fine and I am +1 to the approach
  • For incorporating random GPL code found on the internet I think we are stuck (due to our license having an exception to the GPL), not a down check we just need to be aware of the limits
  • My personal dial is moving from open source license towards free software license the more I see frustrations like this, and the more I see GPL keep code together in a sustainable pile rather than fragment …

aside: For the elastic search there are to problems a) lack of CLA b) use of government code. Rant: Especially for American government it is the “public domain” part making it inconvenient to work with; NGA tried to work out how to sign something with OSGeo but they got stuck. These CLAs are about “owner” providing permission, setting projects up to use copyright to enforce open source license. Public domain messes with that making open source license hard to enforce. Work around in geotools is to have an individual copy the content into the project, but after a while that ends up being us developers so it is not a sustainable approach.

···

–
Jody Garnett

8

Sorry I was tired, I am proposing changes on this email thread as I want to get the words right, as an example “found code” not working for you to communicate these community / extensions modules. Any other ideas for a “catchy name” …

Missing from this was my personal feedback:

  • For everything written as a GeoServer extension I believe the approach you outline will work fine and I am +1 to the approach
  • For incorporating random GPL code found on the internet I think we are stuck (due to our license having an exception to the GPL), not a down check we just need to be aware of the limits

I think the proposal is explicit about requiring module here… but I

aside: For the elastic search there are to problems a) lack of CLA b) use of government code. Rant: Especially for American government it is the “public domain” part making it inconvenient to work with; NGA tried to work out how to sign something with OSGeo but they got stuck. These CLAs are about “owner” providing permission, setting projects up to use copyright to enforce open source license. Public domain messes with that making open source license hard to enforce. Work around in geotools is to have an individual copy the content into the project, but after a while that ends up being us developers so it is not a sustainable approach.

I’m having troubles following up here. Does it mean that even relaxing the the requirements they could not contribute?
And yet, I see in their repository, in the gt-elatiscsearch module:
https://github.com/ngageoint/elasticgeo/blob/master/gt-elasticsearch/LICENSE ← LGPL here

However the headers say otherwise (public domain):
https://github.com/ngageoint/elasticgeo/blob/master/gt-elasticsearch/src/main/java/mil/nga/giat/data/elasticsearch/ElasticAggregation.java

Cheers
Andrea

···

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information. == Ing. Andrea Aime @geowolf Technical Lead GeoSolutions S.A.S. Via di Montramito 3/A 55054 Massarosa (LU) phone: +39 0584 962313 fax: +39 0584 1660272 mob: +39 339 8844549 http://www.geo-solutions.it http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it ------------------------------------------------------- Con riferimento alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg. UE 2016/679 - Regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si precisa che ogni circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo contenuto, gli eventuali allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza è riservata al/i solo/i destinatario/i indicati dallo scrivente. Se il messaggio Le è giunto per errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra operazione è illecita. Le sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene notizia. This email is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. We remind that - as provided by European Regulation 2016/679 “GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of this e-mail or the information herein by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify us immediately by telephone or e-mail.

9

I’ve updated the page to be more explicit, can you check? Feel free to update the wording directly to make it clearer

Cheers
Andrea

···

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information. == Ing. Andrea Aime @geowolf Technical Lead GeoSolutions S.A.S. Via di Montramito 3/A 55054 Massarosa (LU) phone: +39 0584 962313 fax: +39 0584 1660272 mob: +39 339 8844549 http://www.geo-solutions.it http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it ------------------------------------------------------- Con riferimento alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg. UE 2016/679 - Regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si precisa che ogni circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo contenuto, gli eventuali allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza è riservata al/i solo/i destinatario/i indicati dallo scrivente. Se il messaggio Le è giunto per errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra operazione è illecita. Le sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene notizia. This email is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. We remind that - as provided by European Regulation 2016/679 “GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of this e-mail or the information herein by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify us immediately by telephone or e-mail.

10

Thanks Andrea, sorry to be so careful with this stuff … too much time as osgeo incubation chair.

And as you can see that elasticgeo is exactly the kind of “mess” the US government makes trying to use public and open source licenses.

I can try using the osgeo board to kick the NGA again but they are a train wreck at present.

I should be clear that we as individuals can “fix” by copying the code and placing it into our repository; it is the government employees who cannot fix. On the bright side the public domain part means we can copy it into our code and put it under any license we want (including our GPL+Exception).

···

–
Jody Garnett

11

Hello all,

I was more involved than anyone in those “years” pursing the CLA for ElasticGeo and so I hope you’ll tolerate my long-winded comments here.

As the maintainer of ElasticGeo I am trying again to contribute the project as Elasticsearch community modules in GeoTools and (if successful) GeoServer. Previous attempts have failed because of issues involving getting a signed CLA. It’s been slow because the CLA is a legal document and it required signature by the U.S. Government.

Now I am no longer a U.S. Government employee and am trying again since all my contributions are covered under my OSGeo ICLA. But now the issue is with requiring CLA signatures from the other ElasticGeo contributors, where at least one of these would still be subject to the Government CLA signature requirement. I am trying to get the project moved under GeoTools/GeoServer for better maintenance, visibility and integration with the developer and user communities built around those projects. ElasticGeo has been stable but even light maintenance is more difficult for me as the only current maintainer because I have moved on from the organization. As a result the project is in danger of becoming fractured or orphaned despite having a small but consistent community of users and contributors.

Regarding the license and header discrepancy in the ElasticGeo repository, the GeoTools component (gt-elasticsearch) is LGPL since it includes classes like https://github.com/ngageoint/elasticgeo/blob/master/gt-elasticsearch/src/main/java/mil/nga/giat/data/elasticsearch/FilterToElastic.java that were based on GeoTools classes. Any new files that were created like https://github.com/ngageoint/elasticgeo/blob/master/gt-elasticsearch/src/main/java/mil/nga/giat/data/elasticsearch/ElasticAggregation.java have the public domain header since those parts were public domain. More officially the ElasticGeo licensing is stated in the README as follows: “Software source code previously released under an open source license and then modified by NGA staff is considered a “joint work” (see 17 USC 101); it is partially copyrighted, partially public domain, and as a whole is protected by the copyrights of the non-government authors and must be released according to the terms of the original open source license.”.

In the GeoTools MR fork all files have been updated with the OSGeo copyright headers. The one thing I haven’t been comfortable with is the idea of rebasing out attribution to other contributors just because they can’t sign the CLA. I was hoping since ElasticGeo is an established open source project released under LGPL (gt-elasticsearch) and GPL (gs-elasticsearch) that the contributions could be recognized as having satisfied the intent of the OSGeo CLA in this case.

More generally though I do like the proposal in https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-186. My opinion is certainly based on my experience. But one thing I wonder is if the CLA process is something that other open source communities are continuing to follow or if there have been any alternative processes that have been more successful in protecting projects and members while also being as inclusive as possible in a diverse and evolving community of open source developers.

On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 10:39 AM Jody Garnett <jody.garnett@anonymised.com> wrote:

Thanks Andrea, sorry to be so careful with this stuff … too much time as osgeo incubation chair.

And as you can see that elasticgeo is exactly the kind of “mess” the US government makes trying to use public and open source licenses.

I can try using the osgeo board to kick the NGA again but they are a train wreck at present.

I should be clear that we as individuals can “fix” by copying the code and placing it into our repository; it is the government employees who cannot fix. On the bright side the public domain part means we can copy it into our code and put it under any license we want (including our GPL+Exception).

–
Jody Garnett

On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 at 08:06, Andrea Aime <andrea.aime@anonymised.com.1268…> wrote:

On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 5:03 PM Andrea Aime <andrea.aime@anonymised.com> wrote:

I think the proposal is explicit about requiring module here… but I

I’ve updated the page to be more explicit, can you check? Feel free to update the wording directly to make it clearer

Cheers
Andrea

==

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information. == Ing. Andrea Aime @geowolf Technical Lead GeoSolutions S.A.S. Via di Montramito 3/A 55054 Massarosa (LU) phone: +39 0584 962313 fax: +39 0584 1660272 mob: +39 339 8844549 http://www.geo-solutions.it http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it ------------------------------------------------------- Con riferimento alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg. UE 2016/679 - Regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si precisa che ogni circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo contenuto, gli eventuali allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza è riservata al/i solo/i destinatario/i indicati dallo scrivente. Se il messaggio Le è giunto per errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra operazione è illecita. Le sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene notizia. This email is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. We remind that - as provided by European Regulation 2016/679 “GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of this e-mail or the information herein by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify us immediately by telephone or e-mail.

Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

12

Thanks for the background:

It may be efficient to attend a bi-weekly geoserver meeting, as email is a laborious way to talk through these issues.

a) Your background really helps, thank you.
c) For things coming into LGPL it is fine, we know how to handle public domain contributions. We just push back from government employees expecting to work this way all the time (as it means they require a constant drain on community time and cannot work independently).

As a private individual you are very much in position to package up this elasticgeo code and contribute to the geotools project.

  • I think our geotools license page is really clear that public domain is an exception to the normal state of things, making a note of modules that are odd, or source code provided under public domain with notices and javadocs.
  • If I was doing this today I would not place the documentation code under public domain (since it is not a license), but instead use a license like MIT.

As for the value of a CLA - As noted in the discussion GeoServer is one of the few communities that take advantage of the additional abilities granted by a contribution license agreement. It gives the project leadership the ability to relicense code when donating “upstream” to the LGPL geotools project or BSD/EPL JTS Project.

For communities that are strictly GPL a CLA does not in my opinion earn its keep. Indeed this was how I had advised policy for my previous employer: “free” GPL contributions are fine as is, permissive “open” contributions made use of a CLA.

A CLA is in many ways just another open source license, the interesting thing is setting up an asymmetric relationship with the project maintainers having additional protections under the contributor license agreement than the “users” have under the distribution license agreement. The above is my opinion / experience, and I am learning more all the time.

Jody Garnett

On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 at 21:04, sjudeng <sjudeng@anonymised.com> wrote:

Hello all,

I was more involved than anyone in those “years” pursing the CLA for ElasticGeo and so I hope you’ll tolerate my long-winded comments here.

As the maintainer of ElasticGeo I am trying again to contribute the project as Elasticsearch community modules in GeoTools and (if successful) GeoServer. Previous attempts have failed because of issues involving getting a signed CLA. It’s been slow because the CLA is a legal document and it required signature by the U.S. Government.

Now I am no longer a U.S. Government employee and am trying again since all my contributions are covered under my OSGeo ICLA. But now the issue is with requiring CLA signatures from the other ElasticGeo contributors, where at least one of these would still be subject to the Government CLA signature requirement. I am trying to get the project moved under GeoTools/GeoServer for better maintenance, visibility and integration with the developer and user communities built around those projects. ElasticGeo has been stable but even light maintenance is more difficult for me as the only current maintainer because I have moved on from the organization. As a result the project is in danger of becoming fractured or orphaned despite having a small but consistent community of users and contributors.

Regarding the license and header discrepancy in the ElasticGeo repository, the GeoTools component (gt-elasticsearch) is LGPL since it includes classes like https://github.com/ngageoint/elasticgeo/blob/master/gt-elasticsearch/src/main/java/mil/nga/giat/data/elasticsearch/FilterToElastic.java that were based on GeoTools classes. Any new files that were created like https://github.com/ngageoint/elasticgeo/blob/master/gt-elasticsearch/src/main/java/mil/nga/giat/data/elasticsearch/ElasticAggregation.java have the public domain header since those parts were public domain. More officially the ElasticGeo licensing is stated in the README as follows: “Software source code previously released under an open source license and then modified by NGA staff is considered a “joint work” (see 17 USC 101); it is partially copyrighted, partially public domain, and as a whole is protected by the copyrights of the non-government authors and must be released according to the terms of the original open source license.”.

In the GeoTools MR fork all files have been updated with the OSGeo copyright headers. The one thing I haven’t been comfortable with is the idea of rebasing out attribution to other contributors just because they can’t sign the CLA. I was hoping since ElasticGeo is an established open source project released under LGPL (gt-elasticsearch) and GPL (gs-elasticsearch) that the contributions could be recognized as having satisfied the intent of the OSGeo CLA in this case.

More generally though I do like the proposal in https://github.com/geoserver/geoserver/wiki/GSIP-186. My opinion is certainly based on my experience. But one thing I wonder is if the CLA process is something that other open source communities are continuing to follow or if there have been any alternative processes that have been more successful in protecting projects and members while also being as inclusive as possible in a diverse and evolving community of open source developers.

On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 10:39 AM Jody Garnett <jody.garnett@anonymised.com3…> wrote:

Thanks Andrea, sorry to be so careful with this stuff … too much time as osgeo incubation chair.

And as you can see that elasticgeo is exactly the kind of “mess” the US government makes trying to use public and open source licenses.

I can try using the osgeo board to kick the NGA again but they are a train wreck at present.

I should be clear that we as individuals can “fix” by copying the code and placing it into our repository; it is the government employees who cannot fix. On the bright side the public domain part means we can copy it into our code and put it under any license we want (including our GPL+Exception).

–
Jody Garnett

On Thu, 23 Jan 2020 at 08:06, Andrea Aime <andrea.aime@…1268…> wrote:

On Thu, Jan 23, 2020 at 5:03 PM Andrea Aime <andrea.aime@anonymised.com> wrote:

I think the proposal is explicit about requiring module here… but I

I’ve updated the page to be more explicit, can you check? Feel free to update the wording directly to make it clearer

Cheers
Andrea

==

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information. == Ing. Andrea Aime @geowolf Technical Lead GeoSolutions S.A.S. Via di Montramito 3/A 55054 Massarosa (LU) phone: +39 0584 962313 fax: +39 0584 1660272 mob: +39 339 8844549 http://www.geo-solutions.it http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it ------------------------------------------------------- Con riferimento alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg. UE 2016/679 - Regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si precisa che ogni circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo contenuto, gli eventuali allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza è riservata al/i solo/i destinatario/i indicati dallo scrivente. Se il messaggio Le è giunto per errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra operazione è illecita. Le sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene notizia. This email is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. We remind that - as provided by European Regulation 2016/679 “GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of this e-mail or the information herein by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify us immediately by telephone or e-mail.

Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel

13

Wanted to explicitly reply to “satisfying intent”, and I hope project leads agree with my take:

In the GeoTools MR fork all files have been updated with the OSGeo copyright headers. The one thing I haven’t been comfortable with is the idea of rebasing out attribution to other contributors just because they can’t sign the CLA. I was hoping since ElasticGeo is an established open source project released under LGPL (gt-elasticsearch) and GPL (gs-elasticsearch) that the contributions could be recognized as having satisfied the intent of the OSGeo CLA in this case.

Trying to establish:

  • Intent (personal or employer) to shared with others as open source
  • Permission for project leadership to do odd things (like donate to JTS, or include in a product that has both GPL and a couple EPL code)

My take is your ElasticGeo work is fine:

  • Attribution, and a note that the work was public domain, are going to be maintained (we like to respect original authors)

  • Contributions made as LGPL shows the understanding that this is going to be distributed as open source

  • Contributions made as LGPL show no conflict with use with EPL libraries

  • Contributions made that extend GeoServer API also work (GPL with an exception to work with a couple EPL library)

  • Public domain is your cue to act as an individual and take the code across any open source boundaries

  • Public domain also let’s the project leaders re-license etc…

Net result:

  • If you want you could package this up, and fill in a software grant (one of the CLAs) indicating the work is a mix of open source and public domain code you are providing to the geoserver project.

The place where we need GSP-186 is for the planet.com code which has just placed into a repository (fortunately using the GeoServer GPL w/ exception) license. If planet would donate this work to OSGeo we would be done, without their participation we are stuck changing our procedure as Andrea proposed.

14

Hi Jody,

after reading this mail I’m more confused than before. Right now we have a simple and clear rule, CLA or bust (it’s what’s written in our docs, did I misread them?)
The proposal allows to open a second path for those that don’t want/can’t sign a CLA. Seems clear too.

What you are discussing here is new rules, which seem to made up for the occasion, while they might be correct in general, I don’t think they are not a match for our documentation (happy to be proved wrong).
Could you clarify and possibly make a proposal to change the GT/GS documentation accordingly, on how to handle public domain code?

Cheers
Andrea

···

Regards, Andrea Aime == GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information. == Ing. Andrea Aime @geowolf Technical Lead GeoSolutions S.A.S. Via di Montramito 3/A 55054 Massarosa (LU) phone: +39 0584 962313 fax: +39 0584 1660272 mob: +39 339 8844549 http://www.geo-solutions.it http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it ------------------------------------------------------- Con riferimento alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg. UE 2016/679 - Regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si precisa che ogni circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo contenuto, gli eventuali allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza è riservata al/i solo/i destinatario/i indicati dallo scrivente. Se il messaggio Le è giunto per errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra operazione è illecita. Le sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene notizia. This email is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. We remind that - as provided by European Regulation 2016/679 “GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of this e-mail or the information herein by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify us immediately by telephone or e-mail.

15

Also could you clarify what, if any, applies to the ArcGIS TPK case here https://github.com/geotools/geotools/pull/2592 ?
Thank you

Cheers
Andrea

···

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information. == Ing. Andrea Aime @geowolf Technical Lead GeoSolutions S.A.S. Via di Montramito 3/A 55054 Massarosa (LU) phone: +39 0584 962313 fax: +39 0584 1660272 mob: +39 339 8844549 http://www.geo-solutions.it http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it ------------------------------------------------------- Con riferimento alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg. UE 2016/679 - Regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si precisa che ogni circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo contenuto, gli eventuali allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza è riservata al/i solo/i destinatario/i indicati dallo scrivente. Se il messaggio Le è giunto per errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra operazione è illecita. Le sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene notizia. This email is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. We remind that - as provided by European Regulation 2016/679 “GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of this e-mail or the information herein by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify us immediately by telephone or e-mail.

16

We got a bit sidetracked as geotools was mentioned, and how to handle public domain.

Net result is your proposal is fine:

  • CLA for core
  • individual module can use GeoServer license (gpl+Epl library)

If we want to be explicit about how to handle public domain a second proposal could be drawn up.

···

–
Jody Garnett

17

Thanks for the detail on path forward for the Elasticsearch module. We can take the follow-up to the geotools-devel thread so as not to further distract from the discussion here. Again I think the updates in this proposal would be a good move and help cases like the one I’ve been struggling with and I only wish it had been in place years ago.

On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 7:54 PM Jody Garnett <jody.garnett@anonymised.com> wrote:

We got a bit sidetracked as geotools was mentioned, and how to handle public domain.

Net result is your proposal is fine:

  • CLA for core
  • individual module can use GeoServer license (gpl+Epl library)

If we want to be explicit about how to handle public domain a second proposal could be drawn up.

On Sat, Jan 25, 2020 at 5:14 AM Andrea Aime <andrea.aime@anonymised.com> wrote:

Hi Jody,

after reading this mail I’m more confused than before. Right now we have a simple and clear rule, CLA or bust (it’s what’s written in our docs, did I misread them?)
The proposal allows to open a second path for those that don’t want/can’t sign a CLA. Seems clear too.

What you are discussing here is new rules, which seem to made up for the occasion, while they might be correct in general, I don’t think they are not a match for our documentation (happy to be proved wrong).
Could you clarify and possibly make a proposal to change the GT/GS documentation accordingly, on how to handle public domain code?

Cheers
Andrea

On Fri, Jan 24, 2020 at 10:35 PM Jody Garnett <jody.garnett@anonymised.com> wrote:

Wanted to explicitly reply to “satisfying intent”, and I hope project leads agree with my take:

In the GeoTools MR fork all files have been updated with the OSGeo copyright headers. The one thing I haven’t been comfortable with is the idea of rebasing out attribution to other contributors just because they can’t sign the CLA. I was hoping since ElasticGeo is an established open source project released under LGPL (gt-elasticsearch) and GPL (gs-elasticsearch) that the contributions could be recognized as having satisfied the intent of the OSGeo CLA in this case.

Trying to establish:

  • Intent (personal or employer) to shared with others as open source
  • Permission for project leadership to do odd things (like donate to JTS, or include in a product that has both GPL and a couple EPL code)

My take is your ElasticGeo work is fine:

  • Attribution, and a note that the work was public domain, are going to be maintained (we like to respect original authors)

  • Contributions made as LGPL shows the understanding that this is going to be distributed as open source

  • Contributions made as LGPL show no conflict with use with EPL libraries

  • Contributions made that extend GeoServer API also work (GPL with an exception to work with a couple EPL library)

  • Public domain is your cue to act as an individual and take the code across any open source boundaries

  • Public domain also let’s the project leaders re-license etc…

Net result:

  • If you want you could package this up, and fill in a software grant (one of the CLAs) indicating the work is a mix of open source and public domain code you are providing to the geoserver project.

The place where we need GSP-186 is for the planet.com code which has just placed into a repository (fortunately using the GeoServer GPL w/ exception) license. If planet would donate this work to OSGeo we would be done, without their participation we are stuck changing our procedure as Andrea proposed.

–

Regards, Andrea Aime == GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information. == Ing. Andrea Aime @geowolf Technical Lead GeoSolutions S.A.S. Via di Montramito 3/A 55054 Massarosa (LU) phone: +39 0584 962313 fax: +39 0584 1660272 mob: +39 339 8844549 http://www.geo-solutions.it http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it ------------------------------------------------------- Con riferimento alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg. UE 2016/679 - Regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si precisa che ogni circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo contenuto, gli eventuali allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza è riservata al/i solo/i destinatario/i indicati dallo scrivente. Se il messaggio Le è giunto per errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra operazione è illecita. Le sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene notizia. This email is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. We remind that - as provided by European Regulation 2016/679 “GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of this e-mail or the information herein by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify us immediately by telephone or e-mail.

–

–
Jody Garnett

18

Cleaned up a couple formatting issues on GSIP-186, and had the following suggestion:

Allow third party to contribute code without signing a CLA, as long as the code is clearly identified and contained in its own module/extension.

Changed to:

Allow GeoServer to include third-party code in situations where the original author is unavailable to sign a CLA, as long as the code is clearly identified and contained in its own module/extension.

The change of wording makes sure the active party doing the work always has a singed CLA on hand.

I think the proposal is ready to be wrapped up and voted on.

···

–
Jody Garnett

19

Are you okay with the proposed wording?

···

–
Jody Garnett

20

Seems ok, tell me why I should be worried?

Cheers
Andrea

···

Regards, Andrea Aime == GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V for more information. == Ing. Andrea Aime @geowolf Technical Lead GeoSolutions S.A.S. Via di Montramito 3/A 55054 Massarosa (LU) phone: +39 0584 962313 fax: +39 0584 1660272 mob: +39 339 8844549 http://www.geo-solutions.it http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it ------------------------------------------------------- Con riferimento alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg. UE 2016/679 - Regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si precisa che ogni circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo contenuto, gli eventuali allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza è riservata al/i solo/i destinatario/i indicati dallo scrivente. Se il messaggio Le è giunto per errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra operazione è illecita. Le sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene notizia. This email is intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure. We remind that - as provided by European Regulation 2016/679 “GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of this e-mail or the information herein by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify us immediately by telephone or e-mail.