Mailing-List: contact esme-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: esme-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=s1024; d=yahoo.com;
  h=Message-ID:X-YMail-OSG:Received:X-Mailer:References:Date:From:Subject:To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type;
  b=eFHEFSNpJ3XI4bO7KiInJP6pASCmlF5dDFKtu6I8ZIdLVGv6dfHIlSvMWwyWvwjqdT/7rBX7G0zTZI3ESNqVqJNNdXQ0KrNTop0TDIO7QFVotUAgj0WFIEpsTpm/Oqbd6SICxhtMhA373Ldn5LX07LypOS0i6Yw5F6NnIXT2Zow=;
Message-ID: <461642.13486.qm@web54409.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
References: <fa2d9f451001120504j6ee62f2cm7f0857d8433597a5@mail.gmail.com>
  <f767f0601001120515q66478586i6ec555872135dd2f@mail.gmail.com>
  <f767f0601001120556g6dbc25bbo3d3f2a4a93e13427@mail.gmail.com>
  <3d89f1771001120642o3409113am7898b350c09532fd@mail.gmail.com>
  <345564.1512.qm@web54402.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
 <3d89f1771001121320q251ea2canc8d02778ef7d3bd3@mail.gmail.com>
  <437450.60316.qm@web54410.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
 <3d89f1771001121335u72544197j5249ea6671e5c074@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 2010 13:44:08 -0800 (PST)
From: Joe Schaefer <joe_schaefer@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Dealing with copyright issue (See ESME-47)
To: esme-dev@incubator.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <3d89f1771001121335u72544197j5249ea6671e5c074@mail.gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

----- Original Message ----

> From: Gianugo Rabellino <g.rabellino@sourcesense.com>
> To: esme-dev@incubator.apache.org
> Sent: Tue, January 12, 2010 4:35:44 PM
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Dealing with copyright issue (See ESME-47)
> 
> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 10:31 PM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
> > ----- Original Message ----
> >
> >> From: Gianugo Rabellino 
> >> To: esme-dev@incubator.apache.org
> >> Sent: Tue, January 12, 2010 4:20:14 PM
> >> Subject: Re: [VOTE] Dealing with copyright issue (See ESME-47)
> >>
> >> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Joe Schaefer wrote:
> >> > I'm hoping another lengthy diatribe from you won't be
> >> > necessary.  While I don't blame you for David's disappearance,
> >> > the reason we bother to document policy is so people don't
> >> > need to get creative with their legal understanding of how the ASF works.
> >> > In the future should this issue ever present itself to you,
> >> > I hope you will do the proper thing and point the errant person
> >> > at the relevant ASF policy
> >>
> >> That would be the same policy that says we _must_ remove copyright
> >> notices from source files, right?
> >
> > Technically it says the copyright holder must do that, not the ASF.
> 
> Oh, please - let's not go there. The fact that the policy misses a (4)
> remove the file in question still doesn't mean the "must" is
> irrelevant. That would be playing with words.

The policy isn't lacking that.  The issue is simple- how to treat commits
that are licensed to us properly but fail to follow policy?  The answer
is simple, either the committer modifies those commits to comply with policy
or his commit access will be revoked and the committed code will be subject
to third-party treatment.  In this case the project has elected to be slightly
more accurate with the situation, but they have done no harm to the org
nor the committer in question by doing so.