commons-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Henri Yandell <flame...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [LANG] Towards 3.3
Date Sun, 26 Jan 2014 23:38:06 GMT
Depends whose arguing probably :)

Our license gives us a right to contributions under Apache 2.0 unless
stated otherwise; the ICLA is playing safer. We can also simply take
anything under a compatible license and include (with suitable licensing).
I did that for a method from Spring.

Hen


On Sun, Jan 26, 2014 at 1:31 PM, Duncan Jones <duncan@wortharead.com> wrote:

> On 26 January 2014 19:47, Duncan Jones <duncan@wortharead.com> wrote:
> > On 26 January 2014 18:49, Benedikt Ritter <britter@apache.org> wrote:
> >> Hi Duncan,
> >>
> >>
> >> 2014/1/26 Duncan Jones <duncan@wortharead.com>
> >>
> >>> On 26 January 2014 13:33, Benedikt Ritter <britter@apache.org> wrote:
> >>> > Hi all,
> >>> >
> >>> > we've fixed some bugs and we have some nice new features implemented
> >>> > (DiffBuilder, Jaro-Winkler Distance, RandomUtils, ClassPathUtils),
> so I'm
> >>> > planning to cut a RC in the first week of February.
> >>> >
> >>> > I just wanted to know if there is anything you'd like to have
> included in
> >>> > the next release. Then please tag it with fix version 3.3.
> >>> >
> >>> > Regards,
> >>> > Benedikt
> >>> >
> >>>
> >>> I'm debating whether LANG-341 might be a candidate for inclusion. The
> >>> patch is fairly complete, just needs Javadocs and a couple of
> >>> additional unit tests, which I can sort over the coming week. What do
> >>> you guys think? It seems like a useful addition to me.
> >>>
> >>
> >> Yes looks neat. The problem I'm seeing is, that the last activity is
> from
> >> Nov 2011, and the contributor has no ICLA listed (see [1]), so IP is not
> >> absolutely clear. I'm unsure if we can use this contribution without the
> >> ICLA. Anyway, Hen has contributed the patch Vincent Ricard used, so we
> can
> >> use Hen's patch and improve it.
> >>
> >> Benedikt
> >>
> >> [1] http://people.apache.org/committer-index.html#unlistedclas
> >>
> >
> > Good point. I think in this case I'll ping the contributor to get
> > their thoughts on an ICLA and assume this will miss v3.3. He's done a
> > lot of work to extend Hen's patch and it would be a shame for that not
> > to get committed if he's interested. If there's no reply (or no
> > interest), I'll sort something for v3.4.
> >
>
> Having said that... does this still represent a problem if the
> contributor has patched existing code (containing the Apache license)?
>
> Are there any situations where we can take a patch and apply it to
> trunk without the contributor having an ICLA? I certainly had patches
> applied in the past without an ICLA, but perhaps things were more lax
> then?
>
>
> >>
> >>>
> >>> Duncan
> >>>
> >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> >>> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> http://people.apache.org/~britter/
> >> http://www.systemoutprintln.de/
> >> http://twitter.com/BenediktRitter
> >> http://github.com/britter
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@commons.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@commons.apache.org
>
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message