CCMWG - 08/06/18
Attending
Time:12:00PM PDT/03:00PM EDT - 01:00PM PDT/04:00PM EDT
Zoom: https://princeton.zoom.us/j/397525264
Participants
- tamsin woo (Data Curation Experts)
- bess (Data Curation Experts)
- Noah Botimer (U. Michigan Library)
- James Griffin (Princeton University Library)
Agenda
- Reviewing the Maintenance Waffle Board Label Colors
- Update on the e-mail sent to the community updating product owners on labels for the first maintenance sprint
- Update on the Roadmap Council nomination request from Richard Green
- Review GitHub Issues for the Initial Sprint
- Preparation for Samvera Connect 2018
- Partner Meeting Update
- Additional Agenda Items?
Notes
- Griffin closed BrowseEverything issue (merging the Pull Request did not close the issue)
- Regarding samvera-labs/maintenance #1, #2, and #3
- Templates probably already exist, we should locate these
- Adding contact/info to hydra-pcdm seems pretty actionable
- #253
- need to find the actual party holding the license
- Ben: Tracking down contributors and employers?
- Noah: Just find the right copyright statement
- Johnson: That work happened under CLA
- Copyright clearance shouldn't be the issue, just find who owns it
- Sadler: Copyright belongs to "the authors", this is due to the fact that no one can legally give up copyright
- Attribute copyright in a meaningful way
- Johnson: In some cases, some contributors hold the copyright explicitly, while referencing other authors from the commit log
- Armintor: Work for hire issue might become an issue...commit log does not reflect the employer of the authors
- Sadler: Perhaps use "various authors, see the commit log", "institutional contributors"
- Botimer: We effectively have to offer a copyright statement for the license to be valid
- Johnson: Try and use the approach used by Hyrax, defer to Steering
- Sadler: This was discussed by Steering at some point in the past
- Botimer: Is it reasonable to refer to this as covered by an umbrella?
- No copyright granted from the individuals, but as we redistributed this code base...
- We have no organization which we can reference
- Armintor: Another approach would be to document the places where we have no copyright holder identified;
- Can report to Partners about this...perhaps enforce this moving ahead...
- If this is work for hire and your employer isn't represented in the copyright statement...pitch it back to the Partners
- Sadler: Are we really worried about copyright?
- Johnson: We aren't terribly worried...covered pretty clearly by CLAs
- Question more about licensing than clearance
- Armintor: Is this project being cared for by the entire Samvera organization?
- It seems totally acceptable to acknowledge that this is a core component and that the organization needs to get into line with supporting it
- Sadler: Don't want to kick it up to Steering or a larger group
- Botimer: Come up with some text...acknowledging that we don't have an actual owner
- Not interested in proper enforcement or attribution
- Prefer that we have something more solid...come up with a way to state something more useful...redistribution should include the copyright notice
- Need to have this copyright notice in place, otherwise it will be problematic
- Sadler: What is the process for getting prose?
- Johnson: #3 should resolve this in the broad case
- Not certain that we need the process as we do need someone to assign themselves
- Sadler: We should look up the old template from Steering
- We should not start from scratch...start from the original memorandum of understanding
- Armintor:
- (Referenced Code Copyright Statement)
- #251
- Substantial issue for hydra-pcdm
- #250 is blocked by #251 (cannot release with a failing build)
- Otherwise, aim to release this on a reasonable timeline
- Botimer:
- Everything was passing and going to 5.2
- There will need to be some small code changes
- Johnson:
- If this can't be released, we need some blocking issues derived from this ticket
- active_fedora
- 1320
- Johnson:
- The format is older than what we're using to satisfy GitHub
- Also, 2011 for Stanford and MediaShelf, LLC
- Close as "won't fix"? Maybe update license to the newer format?
- Botimer:
- Agrees, assuming that the additional text is added
- Question would be whether we add something from this year?
- At this point the statement is incorrect
- Johnson:
- This license should follow the template in samvera-labs#3
- ldp
- #93
- Johnson:
- Copyright concerns...this repo. was in Chris Beer's namespace for a while
- Armintor:
- Sympathetic about wanting to avoid Steering...but it still might be worth mentioning that the licenses have problems in may popular repositories
- Johnson:
- Still prefer to work with the template...otherwise, possible opportunities for bike-shedding
- Johnson:
- #97
- Related to samvera-labs/maintenance#2
- #93
- Additional Gems
- Johnson:
- Do we want to add any additional Gems?
- Botimer:
- Perhaps...move more of the issues which relate to housekeeping (e. g. contributing guidelines from other Gems)
- browse_everything
- Not enough time to release 1.0 during the sprints
- hydra-editor
- Integrate code coverage
- rubydora
- #113
- Johnson:
- Does this have a lower priority? If so...perhaps
- Botimer:
- Yes, but it should be straightforward
- hydra-derivatives
- browse-everything
- #227
- Johnson:
- MIT vs. Apache2
- Who can decide?
- Rights holder is every contributor
- MIT punts are not under Apache 2
- This WG might not be able to migrate the license
- Might need to leave the Samvera namespace
- Botimer:
- Under MIT relicensing is possible
- Documentation change, relicense, and copyright it as Apache2
- This requires that we provide the existing MIT license
- Johnson:
- We may or may not need to retain the MIT license
- Seems to be a high priority issue
- Armintor:
- Referenced https://wiki.duraspace.org/display/samvera/Samvera+Community+Intellectual+Property+Licensing+and+Ownership
- License needs to be appropriate to the pr
- Johnson: