On 08.02.2006 09:48:39 Justin Erenkrantz wrote: > On 2/7/06, David E. Jones <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Are there any guidelines about the size of a code contribution that > > would necessitate a license grant document? > > You would just need a CLA not a software grant form for each contributor.
That seems contradictory to what the IP clearance page says. Now I'm totally confused because that would mean we don't need that complex process of getting the software grant together for that contribution we're planning to integrate in Apache FOP because we have ICLAs on file for all three contributors. > SpamAssassin required every person who ever submitted a patch that was > committed to submit a CLA. This implied that every person who ever > contributed a rule to SA signed a CLA with the ASF before Incubation > was complete. (SA was also changing licenses too.) That was their > biggest hurdle in Incubation, and it's probably going to be the > biggest challenge for any existing open-source project that has a > community as well to enter the ASF. > > Targetting everyone is probably the correct way to start off. At a > minimum, anyone who ever had write access to your repositories should > have a CLA on file before graduation. Once you see how many people > you can't get CLAs for, then we can make a determination about what to > do next: remove the patches they contributed from the code base or > deem them small enough contributions not to require a CLA. > > (In case you're wondering, the current ALv2 says that Contributions > made back to us are licensed to us under the ALv2 - therefore, we > don't *require* CLAs from people who don't have commit who send us > patches on our mailing list.) Jeremias Maerki --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
