Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 21478 invoked from network); 8 Mar 2008 07:08:16 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 8 Mar 2008 07:08:15 -0000 Received: (qmail 1187 invoked by uid 500); 8 Mar 2008 07:08:10 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-general-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 987 invoked by uid 500); 8 Mar 2008 07:08:10 -0000 Mailing-List: contact general-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: general@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list general@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 970 invoked by uid 99); 8 Mar 2008 07:08:10 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:08:10 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [85.25.139.175] (HELO srv03.codedragons.com) (85.25.139.175) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sat, 08 Mar 2008 07:07:22 +0000 Received: from [202.146.77.122] (helo=f3.local) by srv03.codedragons.com with esmtpsa (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1JXtFX-0006R0-86; Sat, 08 Mar 2008 08:13:43 +0100 From: Niclas Hedhman To: general@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: FW: (qpid) Diversity Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 15:07:35 +0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.5 References: <200803041707.22653.dkulp@apache.org> <47D0FF3F.9070800@rowe-clan.net> In-Reply-To: <47D0FF3F.9070800@rowe-clan.net> Cc: legal-discuss@apache.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200803081507.35753.niclas@hedhman.org> X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Friday 07 March 2008 16:39, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: > So the CCLA exists for those who's employment agreements would otherwise > cause them to violate their claims made via their CLA contract. Uhhh.... So, are we now saying that heaps of people don't need to get the CCLA from their employer? I thought the CCLA was the "belt and suspenders" to ensure that the employee has the right that he claims. Otherwise, why is the CCLA a matter between the employer and ASF, and not a standard document to be signed between the employer and employee, for the employee to keep. Cheers -- Niclas Hedhman, Software Developer I live here; http://tinyurl.com/2qq9er I work here; http://tinyurl.com/2ymelc I relax here; http://tinyurl.com/2cgsug --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org