-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 25
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Dual / Relicence under EPL2.0 / Contribute to Eclipse #70
Comments
First, I must apologize for being unresponsive. The last few months have been "a bit busy", and in fact I think that will still be the case until end of August or so. I will check with all contributors if adding an Eclipse license would be OK. I initially choose Apache 2 because it is permissive. The lack or responsiveness also accounts for a bit of my reluctance to include this in Eclipse proper. I don't think of this as dodging responsibility, but more like the responsible thing to do Last, there are a couple of issues that I would like to solve before "inflicting" this plugin on all the Eclipse users:
All this being said, I would be really happy to help integrate this into Eclipse, if someone wants to take the lead. |
Example of dual license Apache 2 / Eclipse 2: |
@mihnita no problem and thanks for your feedback, dual license would at least allow for others to take the code and integrate it, but would mostly make sense if you choose to keep this as a separate project. Assuming this would be integrated in eclipse, I think it would make more sense to abandon the standalone project and give a reference to eclipse to prevent confusion / diverge of the project. About responsibilities I think no one will or can put anything on you unless he pays you for that and you accept that offer, but for sure it would be helpful to give some guidance here and there. Beside that I think once this is integrated in eclipse there is also a wider audience of people who can help with fixing and reviewing / merging code so this probably even gets away some responsibilities from you as there are others that could help (don't know if you are probably the only one with write access to this repository). |
That was fast :-) Thank you! I am no license expert either. Not that it really matters... If this becomes part of Eclipse proper I don't see any reason to
Well, I put it on myself :-) I would be happy to continue supporting it as part of Eclipse (if you guys want me to). |
I just wanted to say that you are not alone, so even if you are absent and there are bug / problems others could jump in, if not the problem might not be that serve anyway ;-)
Eclipse has recently moved to github, so everything you need is to sign the ECA and are ready to contribute (not only console code of course), bigger contributions require an IP clearance but thats nothing you need to care of right now, if you could get in contact with the other contributors and the agree to publish an EPL 2.0 licende variant this could be done in this repository I think. If you like to support more directly it should even be possible to nominate you as a committer for eclipse once your code contribution was accepted. |
I've contacted all people who contributed anything to this project. One contributor only had small changes to the
And one added an I've pinged them twice, no answer... But the changes are minor, I doubt anyone can claim copyright on that. If debatable I can just revert those changes. All contributors that helped with code approved the PR already. So, what do you think is best:
Thank you, |
Thanks for your all your effort, I think it is safe to merge and just keep it in mind once we ask for IP approval at Eclipse, they can then decide if any action is required, as you said the @waynebeaton please correct me if I'm wrong here :-) |
Great! Thanks a lot. After this licensing issue has been finally resolved, is there already a plan how to continue (with Bug 112948)? |
When you bring the content to the attention of the Eclipse IP Team, be sure to tell them about the license change and point to this discussion. If you have questions/concerns, they can help. I am not a lawyer and this should not be considered legal advice. My understanding is that, in the absence an explicit grant of rights (e.g., a CLA) to unilaterally make the change, all copyright holders must agree to a license change. That agreement should be recorded on some durable record (e.g., a GitHub issue). Note that there is no rule that requires that content contributed to an Eclipse project be contributed under the Eclipse Public License. If some content is contributed under a different license than that of the project (e.g., Apache-2.0 content contributed to a project that distributes content under the EPL-2.0) we would request that you take steps to ensure that the content under the different license is clearly separate (so that contributors can very clearly understand the different licensing terms). Ideally, content under a license that is different from the project license should be kept in a separate repository (or a separate directory at least). |
OK, merged the PR. |
Thank you!
Ack :-) |
Sorry, I am completely unfamiliar with the Eclipse code and processes. I don't know if this would be merged almost "as is" (changing namespaces in the process, I assume :-) Or it will be "dismantled" and integrated directly in some of the existing Maybe someone familiar with the Eclipse code can take a look and decide what is the hight level plan. Then (probably faster) that "someone" can do the work, and I can help as much as I can You have a lot more experience doing this than I have. |
They approved the pull request (#74) |
The process could be roughly like this:
|
That sounds like a good plan. |
Contributed code should be "copied" without the history if migrating code to eclipse.
A separate plugin would make sense here, we can move the code around later if desired, but that way one can 'opt-in' for a while to include ANSI or not. |
Thank you very much Hannes, Christoph. Update: it all sounds good. I'll work on it, following the steps Christoph outlined. Seems straightforward. For now though I am working to get a clearance from my employer. TLDR: I don't expect problems, except for some delay. Regards, |
Great. Thanks for your effort. I just noticed that you now have the https://github.com/mihnita/ansi-econsole/blob/main/AnsiConsole/src/mnita/ansiconsole/participants/AnsiConsoleMavenLaunchParticipant.java, which is very handy when ANSI-Console is installed separately. |
Thank you, yes, no problem, will do that. There is another improvement that I have in mind, once that happen. |
Status update Still waiting for my employer's clearance, just in case. |
Meantime, I am really angry about this: Should I add copyright headers to all source files? Thank you very much, |
@mihnita I can understand that this might feel you mad, but it also shows two things:
nerveless, about your question the EPL 2.0 FAQ recommends to add the following header to all source files:
By the way, you might want to add
Thats very common for eclipse code that is contributed by companies employ people to work on eclipse code. |
Yes, I've noticed. Thank you for the suggestion to add the employer to the copyright notice. Thank you! |
Update, with good news: I got the copyright waiver from my employer. I will start with this: So I will not change namespace, remove the MavenLaunchParticipant or anything else. Then we can take it from there... "When you bring the content to the attention of the Eclipse IP Team, be sure to tell them about the license change and point to this discussion. If you have questions/concerns, they can help." Should I do that somehow? Or one of you will add them to the initial pull request? Thank you all, |
When you open the PR a project committer has to create a CQ for IP clearance, so nothing you have to worry about. |
That's great news. :) Yes that is at least my suggestion for a 100% traceable way. :) And regarding the 'incident' with the concurrent contribution attempt: But I assume he did not act with bad intentions and it was mainly bad communication (which definitely could have been done better). Nevertheless if he or others provides quality contributions (with legal, own work) at Eclipse in the future we will accept that too. In general we accept and appreciate every constructive contribution that is beneficial for Eclipse, regardless who is providing it (given it is legal). |
I think we can just start a commiter-election right after the PR is merged as it is a "larger contribution". |
I tried not to assume anything, that's why I called those actions "missteps" It can happen, especially between people who don't know each other, maybe from completely different cultures, maybe with different levels of experience.
Absolutely! And I don't expect commit rights, not until the existing team members decide that my contributions are good enough (quality & quantity) There is no need to worry. But I hope you will see. |
I propose to close this and continue tracking at eclipse-platform/eclipse.platform.debug#47? |
Yep, code is easy, people are hard.
Welcome to the tribe, it's great to have you on board. :-D
This can happen faster than you think. ;-) From my experience (but I'm only on board for a little bit longer than a year) it is mainly about dedication and knowing the basic processes and rules. But I would say the rules are just 'normal' for a collaborative group; be nice to each other, if in doubt: ask, if something broke: ask for help to fix it. And being proficient in Java and Eclipse is also good, but you don't have to know everything, I think nobody does. :)
Yes let's close this one. 👍🏽 |
In Bug 112948 the interest was expressed to contribute this code to eclipse.
I wonder if a first step would be to either relicence or dual license the code to the EPL 2.0 (would need acknowledgment of all committer) does this sounds realistic?
That would at least ease the legal part / smooth integration into the platform code.
Second, I'd like to know if we (@eclipse-platform-team) can help with getting this nice color console into the platform? Please let us know!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: