Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-legal-discuss-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 31476 invoked from network); 2 Dec 2010 12:45:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 2 Dec 2010 12:45:50 -0000 Received: (qmail 29322 invoked by uid 500); 2 Dec 2010 12:45:49 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-legal-discuss-archive@apache.org Received: (qmail 28988 invoked by uid 500); 2 Dec 2010 12:45:47 -0000 Mailing-List: contact legal-discuss-help@apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: Reply-To: legal-discuss@apache.org List-Id: Delivered-To: mailing list legal-discuss@apache.org Received: (qmail 28981 invoked by uid 99); 2 Dec 2010 12:45:47 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Dec 2010 12:45:47 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.7 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of bimargulies@gmail.com designates 209.85.214.50 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.214.50] (HELO mail-bw0-f50.google.com) (209.85.214.50) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 02 Dec 2010 12:45:39 +0000 Received: by bwz17 with SMTP id 17so7390982bwz.23 for ; Thu, 02 Dec 2010 04:45:19 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=BcsYy+XjvQClgbw3/4VWkd0mJq1arLPO8ixFIeZah1Q=; b=rd0Kv+qBRvpIFBgN5i5+/rx2y+3RMyeE2cGGsXKy5lsyaoUE3Vv9ynPvF9erPg+VM1 YZmtyGadYJdvFwmROD5g9BRgJy/NiOVL2m9gSaZ2iITOcNLGfo52PdxIJnw4YB5E+9Fm Dqq4BndKXHzxCLcomxYekMSh7jrAaUZez24jI= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=GjWhsLxdb0Va9z0CTqanXX2W+HE2L690QdatoCcu0Yuk0+7/T4smcXDoDcJ2Gh0B+F HN88auuJRAiVabY4D/8T2bTsRWc5v5Tp8d4MWgKk3WQoPfwsr66LTF9nJCOMsZ92N/Na kDelyMYdc3zTbW+vCRi0bIkffzikfY9C44yMM= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.61.81 with SMTP id s17mr501927bkh.121.1291293919015; Thu, 02 Dec 2010 04:45:19 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.204.45.66 with HTTP; Thu, 2 Dec 2010 04:45:18 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Thu, 2 Dec 2010 07:45:18 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: icla for bulk import at the incubator From: Benson Margulies To: legal-discuss@apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org > > Short answer: if all of the copyright holders are individuals, then > ICLAs are sufficient Thanks > > Longer answer: > > First, encourage the contributors to actually read the ICLA before > they sign it. =C2=A0In particular, paragraph 4. > > Second, the concurrent software grant at the bottom of the CCLA is option= al. > Yes, but isn't it required if there's some actual code in flight. > More information: > > http://incubator.apache.org/guides/mentor.html#submit-cla > http://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/index.html Sam, I have been editing these to try to clarify the language, and I sent this message because I came down with the willies as to whether I understood what they should say. I'd be grateful if you'd look over them and see if you approve my edits. --benson --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org