Re: OSGeo incubation status

Thanks for you input everyone.

Even, thanks for going through all of the source files! I had hoped to save some work
by crowdsourcing this, but never in a million years had I expected it to be done by
the time I got up the morning after. Very impressive. As far as I can tell there’s only
a minor issues to deal with.

We have a bunch of files without a license header present. The copyright holder
is inferred from the git log. Should we add headers to those files? Also, in many
files substantial work has been done by several developers, even though only
one is stated as the copyright holder. I assume because the developer has
forgotten to add their name in the header. We can also infer those from git, but
is that something that we ought to do?

Concerning the CLA, I take your responses as enough evidence that we do
not need one of those for the PROJ project :-) I have added the following
statement to the Provenance Review document:

"The project has opted to not ask committers to sign a contribution agreement
because 1) the MIT license is permissive which eliminates the desire to re-license
the software, 2) it's an added layer of complexity to the project and 3) some
developers has expressed that they will not sign such an agreement.”

/Kristian


On 10 Sep 2019, at 05:58, Kurt Schwehr <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

Thank you all for the work on the incubation!

Yet another vote for avoiding a CLA.

On Mon, Sep 9, 2019 at 2:26 PM Even Rouault <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
On lundi 9 septembre 2019 21:20:36 CEST Even Rouault wrote:
> > For other files, "git log" on them and finding the original committer
> > should be good enough.
>
> "git log --follow" to be more exact due to renaming/moving around.

OK, I did the exercice of completing Kristian's initiated source file listing
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1Bdu73lw8I1iFX4cb7CIUF6yqWGDTcZKBfW0cUsEjCXk/edit#gid=0
Would be worth being double checked of course.

I've followed an "optimistic" principle, that is to say that we don't have issues
unless strong suspicion of the contrary: PROJ has always been released with
Copyright (c) 2000, Frank Warmerdam as the general license, so I think it is the
reasonable to consider this as the base to use for contributions
unless they state explicitly something else.
The general rules I followed in the case there's no explicit header with copyright & license are:
- files coming from initial commit by Frank in 1999 and present in PROJ 4.3 are copyright Frank
- files without explicit header and coming from SVN or git era are copyright their author
  when it can be recovered from the commit message, or otherwise the committer (Frank most of the times)
I've indicated those 2  situations in the remarks column.

There are a few lines underlined in yellow that might require follow up actions.

Even

--
Spatialys - Geospatial professional services
http://www.spatialys.com<http://www.spatialys.com/>
_______________________________________________
PROJ mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/proj
_______________________________________________
PROJ mailing list
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/proj

_______________________________________________
PROJ mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/proj