License File for Open Source Repositories
IESG Secretary <firstname.lastname@example.org> Fri, 23 December 2016 15:36 UTC
Received: from ietfa.amsl.com (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2578A129561; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 07:36:53 -0800 (PST)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
From: IESG Secretary <email@example.com>
To: "IETF Announcement List" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: License File for Open Source Repositories
Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 07:36:53 -0800
Cc: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
Reply-To: email@example.com, firstname.lastname@example.org
List-Id: "IETF announcement list. No discussions." <ietf-announce.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ietf-announce>, <mailto:email@example.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-announce>, <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 15:36:53 -0000
The IESG has observed that many working groups work with open source repositories even for their work on specifications. That's great, and we're happy to see this development, as it fits well the working style of at least some of our working groups. This style is also likely to be more popular in the future. As always, we'd like to understand areas where we can either be helpful in bringing in some new things such as tooling, or where we need to integrate better between the repository world and the IETF process. As an example of the latter, we're wondering whether it would be helpful to have a standard boilerplate for these repositories with respect to the usual copyright and other matters. The intent is for such text to be placed in a suitable file (e.g., "CONTRIBUTING"), probably along with some additional information that is already present in these files in many repositories. The idea is that people should treat, e.g., text contributions to a draft-foo.xml in a repository much in the same way as they treat text contributions on the list, at least when it comes to copyright, IPR, and other similar issues. We have worked together with the IETF legal team and few key experts from the IETF who are actively using these repositories, and suggest the following text. We're looking to make a decision on this matter on our January 19th, 2017 IESG Telechat, and would appreciate feedback before then. This message will be resent after the holiday period is over to make sure it is noticed. Please send comments to the IESG (email@example.com) by 2017-01-17. The IESG —— This repository relates to activities in the Internet Engineering Task Force(IETF). All material in this repository is considered Contributions to the IETF Standards Process, as defined in the intellectual property policies of IETF currently designated as BCP 78 (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp78), BCP 79 (https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/bcp79) and the IETF Trust Legal Provisions (TLP) Relating to IETF Documents (http://trustee.ietf.org/trust-legal-provisions.html). Any edit, commit, pull-request, comment or other change made to this repository constitutes Contributions to the IETF Standards Process. You agree to comply with all applicable IETF policies and procedures, including, BCP 78, 79, the TLP, and the TLP rules regarding code components (e.g. being subject to a Simplified BSD License) in Contributions.