Yeah, this is why this pops up when you open a PR: https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md
Mostly, I want to take all reasonable steps to ensure that when somebody offers a code contribution, that they are fine with the ways in which it actually used (redistributed under the terms of the AL2), whether or not they understand the intricacies. In good faith, I'm all but sure that all contributors either think they're giving the contribution to the project anyway, or at least, do understand it to be their own work licensed under the same terms as all of the project contributions are. IANAL, but in stricter legal terms, the project license is plain and clear, and the intricacies are signposted and easy to read when you contribute. You would have a very hard time arguing that you made a contribution, didn't state anything about the license, but did not intend somehow that the work could be licensed as the rest of the project is. For reference Apache projects do not in general require a CLA. On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 8:59 PM, Nicholas Chammas <nicholas.cham...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've seen many other OSS projects ask contributors to sign CLAs. I've never > seen us do that. > > I assume it's not an issue, since people opening PRs generally understand > what it means. But legally I'm sure there's some danger in taking an > implied vs. explicit license to do something. > > So: Do we need to make people sign contributor CLAs? > > I'm betting Sean Owen knows something about this... :) > > Nick --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@spark.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@spark.apache.org
