incubator-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Benson <gudnabr...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: DeltaSpike IP clarifications
Date Tue, 17 Jan 2012 21:08:03 GMT
Adding deltaspike-dev back to the distribution:

On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 3:01 PM, Gerhard Petracek <gpetracek@apache.org> wrote:
> ok - matt and i just had a short talk with sam to ensure that we are
> talking about the same.
> it isn't the only way, but to resolve it once and for all it's easier to
> handle it via a software grant.
>
> @matt:
> it would be great if you can contact them again.

Done, copying deltaspike-private.

Matt

>
> @sam:
> thx for your help
>
> regards,
> gerhard
>
>
>
> 2012/1/17 Gerhard Petracek <gpetracek@apache.org>
>
>> hi,
>>
>> in general - fyi:
>> we don't have a huge import. we discuss single features and if we agree on
>> one, one of the members (of the original project) commits it. all authors
>> have their icla on file, joined the project and participate in the
>> discussion and the release votes.
>>
>> regards,
>> gerhard
>>
>>
>>
>> 2012/1/17 Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 2:33 PM, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com
>>> <ralph.goers@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>>> > I didn't mention CCLA's on purpose. A corporation will have a CCLA on
>>> file
>>> > to either a) declare that certain employees are permitted to contribute
>>> > software or b) declare that certain software is contributed to the ASF.
>>>  A
>>> > CCLA that is on file that only includes Schedule A doesn't grant the ASF
>>> > permission to use specific software created by the company. If the
>>> company
>>> > is donating the software they need to specify it. If the software is
>>> being
>>> > contributed via an ICLA then the CCLA simply says the company is giving
>>> the
>>> > contributor the right to contribute software that normally the company
>>> > would own. However, an individual should never contribute software under
>>> > their ICLA that they didn't author, unless they have explicit permission
>>> > from the other authors. For a "significant" contribution a software
>>> grant
>>> > is typically the best way to do it.
>>>
>>> I concur.
>>>
>>> Either an (additional|updated) CCLA with a concurrent software grant
>>> (Schedule B) for the code in question -or- simply a separate Software
>>> Grant would be appreciated.
>>>
>>> If RedHat is on board with this (and everything in this conversations
>>> indicated that that is indeed the case), then that shouldn't be a
>>> problem?
>>>
>>> - Sam Ruby
>>>
>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
>>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org
>>>
>>>
>>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscribe@incubator.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: general-help@incubator.apache.org


Mime
View raw message