Hi,
On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 4:02 AM, Alexander Bezzubov wrote:
> ...It was created and sent as a patch by an individual contributor who owns
> the IP on 1 (not a committer) and I was under impression that it should be
> treated as a regular patch (includes few new files) as we did with similar
> c
Thank you very much for the kind guidance and the detailed explanation.
It helps and makes perfect sense for me.
One thing though, on 1 - it looks like I have unintentionally confuse
people with the word "complex code contribution", which I referred to the
structure of the patch received, rather
Ideally, you would also seek out an SGA from all companies involved in the
contribution. If its all Lightbend, they should be able to provide an SGA
to move the code into an Apache donation, including the license.
John
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 4:09 AM Bertrand Delacretaz
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Thu
Hi,
On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 2:29 AM, Alexander Bezzubov wrote:
> ...The contribution consists of many files that are going to be part of the
> release:...
As you have 3 categories of source code files in this contribution I
suggest handling all 3 separately, creating a ticket in your issue
track
Dear Incubator,
in Apache Zeppelin (incubating) we recently received quite complex code
contribution, so I'm looking for an advice from more experienced IPMC
members here on the legal side.
The contribution consists of many files that are going to be part of the
release:
1. some are original aut
