[dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, November 29th

[Dave Neary]

Hi Mike,

On 11/30/2016 12:39 PM, Michael Dolan wrote:
> Hi Tim, sorry I couldn't make it with a LF Board meeting conflict
> yesterday. As for 1), most/all of our projects facing this issue decide
> to go Apache 2. A CLA is less preferably particularly with the BSD
> license. Where we do use a CLA on a project it's usually the same as the
> Apache CCLA/ICLA and that combined with the BSD license will I'm fairly
> certain not achieve what Linaro legal is probably concerned about.

A follow-on question: Has the Linux Foundation ever taken on a BSD
licensed project in the past? Given that the project has an existing
history and license, a license change might be a more involved change
(both practically and culturally) than the technical community woiuld be
prepared for.

> Just some thoughts on how other projects tackled this question. It would
> probably be best if we push any further discussion on this to a small
> group of your legal counsel as the various levers have different
> implications and I'm uncomfortable continuing this discussion without
> your counsel being involved.

Hopefully an answer specifically about what has been done in the past
would be OK - I understand you don't want to get into the area of advice
here.

Thanks,
Dave.

> On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 9:01 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim
> <tim.odriscoll at intel.com <mailto:tim.odriscoll at intel.com>> wrote:
> 
>     Here are my notes from Tuesday's call. Please feel free to correct
>     any errors or to add additional details.
> 
>     Attendees: Dave Neary (Red Hat), Ed Warnicke (Cisco),
>     Francois-Frederic Ozog (Linaro), Hemant Agrawal (NXP), Jan Blunck
>     (Brocade), Jaswinder Singh (NXP), Jerin Jacob (Cavium), Jim St.
>     Leger (Intel), John McNamara (Intel), Keith Wiles (Intel), Olga
>     Shern (Mellanox), Thomas Monjalon (6WIND), Tim O'Driscoll (Intel),
>     Vincent Jardin (6WIND). Note that there may have been others, but as
>     people joined at different times it was difficult to keep track.
> 
>     Firstly, here are some links to help keep track of things:
>     Project Charter:
>     https://docs.google.com/document/d/1x43ycfW3arJNX-e6NQt3OVzAuNXtD7dppIhrY48FoGs
>     <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1x43ycfW3arJNX-e6NQt3OVzAuNXtD7dppIhrY48FoGs>
>     Summary of discussion at Userspace event in Dublin:
>     http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-October/049259.html
>     <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-October/049259.html>
>     Minutes of October 31st call:
>     http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-November/000031.html
>     <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-November/000031.html>
>     Minutes of November 8th call:
>     http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-November/000058.html
>     <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-November/000058.html>
>     Minutes of November 15th call:
>     http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-November/000061.html
>     <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-November/000061.html>
>     Minutes of November 22nd call:
>     http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-November/000085.html
>     <http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-November/000085.html>
>     Current technical governance, including composition of the Tech
>     Board: http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/contributing/index.html
>     <http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/contributing/index.html> &
>     http://dpdk.org/dev.
> 
> 
>     1. Discussed Contributor License Agreement (CLA) vs Developer
>     Certificate of Origin (DCO)
>     - Current process is to use a DCO.
>     - Francois-Frederic proposed using a CLA. This is based on input
>     from the Linaro legal team and some Linaro members who have
>     indicated that not having a CLA prevents them contributing to or
>     using DPDK.
>     - Discussed what benefit they think they'll get from CLA. The main
>     thing it adds is patent protection. This could be achieved in other
>     ways, for example using the Apache 2.0 license. Neither solution
>     would apply to existing DPDK code though so any benefit would only
>     apply to new code.
>     - Vincent asked if there are problems with other BSD licensed
>     projects. We agreed to check with the Linux Foundation (Mike Dolan)
>     to see if they have any guidance based on other BSD licensed
>     projects. I'll ask Mike.
> 
>     2. Discussed comments on project charter
>     - Agreed that the Governing Board does not specify requirements for
>     the Technical Board to implement. The two boards are peers. One can
>     make suggestions to the other at any time, but these aren't
>     requirements and don't have to be accepted.
>     - Discussed how members are added to/removed from the Technical
>     Board. Agreed that the TB approves adding/removing members. Agreed
>     that the TB needs to consider technical contributions from the
>     individuals and support for all architectures when making these
>     decisions.
>     - Discussed Dave's proposal for a representative of the technical
>     community on the GB (in addition to the rep from the TB). Agreed not
>     to do this and just to keep the single rep from the TB on the GB.
>     Also discussed whether there should be a GB rep on the TB and agreed
>     that this did not make sense.
>     - For voting, agreed that the quorum for a meeting for either board
>     is 50% of the members. Majority required to pass a vote is 50% of
>     the total board except for: a) changes to the charter require 2/3 of
>     the GB; b) licensing exceptions require 2/3 of the GB.
>     - I've updated the charter (section 3 - Project Governance) to
>     reflect these changes.
> 
> 
>     Next Meeting:
>     Tuesday December 6th at 3pm GMT, 4pm CET, 10am EST, 7am PST. We'll
>     focus on the comments on the Membership and Technical Governance
>     sections of the charter, and also discuss CLA/DCO if we have more
>     input/guidance on this from the LF.
> 
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Dave Neary - NFV/SDN Community Strategy
Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com
Ph: +1-978-399-2182 / Cell: +1-978-799-3338