Mailing-List: contact esme-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: esme-dev@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of yojibee@gmail.com designates
 209.85.219.212 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=content-type:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date
         :content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to:x-mailer;
        b=Z7DxVw8MIjCESOPjr/Wj5EnmKvnWAWnSJeK1a2ryPCJwslwy6vMk60xfygk0d8QYlv
         G7pQ54lXDK3nlFmWZ2h01vIicKABwEDfGdTJNOpl+gUVJC6fd5flezWnNG8W209QQBxO
         MsD+/AJPjHndzsXg3wGSojPTIbQ2K/6RR8LWQ=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077)
Subject: Re: [VOTE] Dealing with copyright issue (See ESME-47)
From: =?iso-8859-1?Q?Anne_Kathrine_Petter=F8e?= <yojibee@gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <f767f0601001130007n36db52ebm5b201e3dfb6d5eaa@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jan 2010 11:12:54 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <8320A5D8-6A25-49AD-A03B-17AD015EB076@gmail.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>
 <f767f0601001130007n36db52ebm5b201e3dfb6d5eaa@mail.gmail.com>
To: esme-dev@incubator.apache.org

Just to sum up the vote so far.

ESME PPMC +1: 6
IMPC +1: 3
IMPC -1: 1

We would need one more IMPC +1 vote to ratify the ESME team vote right?

/Anne


On 13. jan. 2010, at 09.07, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:

> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 10:20 PM, Gianugo Rabellino
> <g.rabellino@sourcesense.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Joe Schaefer =
<joe_schaefer@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> ... 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
>>=20
>> That would be the same policy that says we _must_ remove copyright
>> notices from source files, right? The same policy that is now being
>> discarded in light of a compromise that makes very little sense and
>> sets a dangerous precedent?...
>=20
> I don't think we're discarding the policy.
>=20
> David is prevented from making any more commits that contradict this
> policy (as he left, but otherwise I would have asked for a vote to
> revoke his commit rights as suggested on the legal-disccus list), and
> we are treating the remaining copyright notices in the same way as
> we'd do for a committer that is no longer available (for any reason)
> to fix them themselves.
>=20
> Clarifying that we'd revoke people's commit rights if they refuse to
> abide by the policy that we're talking about
> (http://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html) has been a positive
> outcome of this saga, IMHO.
>=20
> -Bertrand