Adding deltaspike-dev back to the distribution: On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 3:01 PM, Gerhard Petracek <gpetra...@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 <gpetra...@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 <ru...@intertwingly.net> >> >>> On Tue, Jan 17, 2012 at 2:33 PM, ralph.goers @dslextreme.com >>> <ralph.go...@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-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org >>> For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org >>> >>> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
