Formally, an ICLA is required, and you can read more here: https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html
In practice, it's unrealistic to collect and verify an ICLA for every PR contributed by 1000s of people. We have not gated on that. But, contributions are in all cases governed by the same terms, even without a signed ICLA. That's the verbiage you're referring to. A CLA is a good idea, for sure, if there are any questions about the terms of your contribution. Here there does seem to be a question - retaining Twilio copyright headers in source code. That is generally not what would happen for your everyday contributions to an ASF project, as the copyright header (and CLAs) already describe the relevant questions of rights: it has been licensed to the ASF. (There are other situations where retaining a distinct copyright header is required, typically when adding code licensed under another OSS license, but I don't think they apply here) I would say you should review and execute a CCLA for Twilio (assuming you agree with the terms) to avoid doubt. On Thu, Aug 3, 2023 at 6:34 PM Rinat Shangeeta <rshange...@twilio.com> wrote: > (Adding my manager Eugene Kim who will cover me as I plan to be out of the > office soon) > > Hi Kent and Sean, > > Nice to meet you. I am working on the OSS legal aspects with Pavan who is > planning to make the contribution request to the Spark project. I saw that > Sean mentioned in his email that the contributions would be governed under > the ASF CCLA. In the Spark contribution guidelines > <https://spark.apache.org/contributing.html>, there is no mention of > having to sign a CCLA. In fact, this is what I found in the contribution > guidelines: > > Contributing code changes > > Please review the preceding section before proposing a code change. This > section documents how to do so. > > When you contribute code, you affirm that the contribution is your > original work and that you license the work to the project under the > project’s open source license. Whether or not you state this explicitly, > by submitting any copyrighted material via pull request, email, or other > means you agree to license the material under the project’s open source > license and warrant that you have the legal authority to do so. > > Can you please point us to an authoritative source about the process? > > Also, is there a way to find out if a signed CCLA already exists for > Twilio from your end? Thanks and appreciate your help! > > > Best, > Rinat > > *Rinat Shangeeta* > Sr. Patent/Open Source Counsel > [image: Twilio] <https://www.twilio.com/?utm_source=email_signature> > > > On Wed, Jul 26, 2023 at 2:27 PM Pavan Kotikalapudi < > pkotikalap...@twilio.com> wrote: > >> Thanks for the response with all the information Sean and Kent. >> >> Is there a way to figure out if my employer (Twilio) part of CCLA? >> >> cc'ing: @Rinat Shangeeta <rshange...@twilio.com> our Open Source Counsel >> at twilio >> >> Thank you, >> >> Pavan >> >> On Tue, Jul 25, 2023 at 10:48 PM Kent Yao <y...@apache.org> wrote: >> >>> Hi Pavan, >>> >>> Refer to the ASF Source Header and Copyright Notice Policy[1], code >>> directly submitted to ASF should include the Apache license header >>> without any additional copyright notice. >>> >>> >>> Kent Yao >>> >>> [1] >>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.apache.org/legal/src-headers.html*headers__;Iw!!NCc8flgU!c_mZKzBbSjJtYRjillV20gRzzzDOgW2ooH6ctfrqaJA8Eu4D5yfA7OlQnGm5JpdAZIU_doYmrsufzUc$ >>> >>> Sean Owen <sro...@apache.org> 于2023年7月25日周二 07:22写道： >>> >>> > >>> > When contributing to an ASF project, it's governed by the terms of the >>> ASF ICLA: >>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.pdf__;!!NCc8flgU!c_mZKzBbSjJtYRjillV20gRzzzDOgW2ooH6ctfrqaJA8Eu4D5yfA7OlQnGm5JpdAZIU_doYmZDPppZg$ >>> or CCLA: >>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://www.apache.org/licenses/cla-corporate.pdf__;!!NCc8flgU!c_mZKzBbSjJtYRjillV20gRzzzDOgW2ooH6ctfrqaJA8Eu4D5yfA7OlQnGm5JpdAZIU_doYmUNwE-5A$ >>> > >>> > I don't believe ASF projects ever retain an original author copyright >>> statement, but rather source files have a statement like: >>> > >>> > ... >>> > * Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one or more >>> > * contributor license agreements. See the NOTICE file distributed >>> with >>> > * this work for additional information regarding copyright ownership. >>> > ... >>> > >>> > While it's conceivable that such a statement could live in a NOTICE >>> file, I don't believe that's been done for any of the thousands of other >>> contributors. That's really more for noting the license of >>> non-Apache-licensed code. Code directly contributed to the project is >>> assumed to have been licensed per above already. >>> > >>> > It might be wise to review the CCLA with Twilio and consider >>> establishing that to govern contributions. >>> > >>> > On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 6:10 PM Pavan Kotikalapudi < >>> pkotikalap...@twilio.com.invalid> wrote: >>> >> >>> >> Hi Spark Dev, >>> >> >>> >> My name is Pavan Kotikalapudi, I work at Twilio. >>> >> >>> >> I am looking to contribute to this spark issue >>> https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SPARK-24815__;!!NCc8flgU!c_mZKzBbSjJtYRjillV20gRzzzDOgW2ooH6ctfrqaJA8Eu4D5yfA7OlQnGm5JpdAZIU_doYmgOh9sIg$ >>> . >>> >> >>> >> There is a clause from the company's OSS saying >>> >> >>> >> - The proposed contribution is about 100 lines of code modification >>> in the Spark project, involving two files - this is considered a large >>> contribution. An appropriate Twilio copyright notice needs to be added for >>> the portion of code that is newly added. >>> >> >>> >> Please let me know if that is acceptable? >>> >> >>> >> Thank you, >>> >> >>> >> Pavan >>> >> >>> >>
