You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to legal-discuss@apache.org by "Jean T. Anderson" <jt...@apache.org> on 2008/07/31 00:02:53 UTC
Question about handling external updates to contributed files
A question has come up on derby-dev about the correct handling of the
re-contribution of translated message files.
IBM included translated message files in the original derby software grant.
We all understand that our ICLAs cover work on any source files we
committers work on at Apache. Committers are updating the English
message files in the Apache svn repo, but they aren't updating the
translated files. For later releases, IBM and Sun have updated the
translations and contributed them back to the project.
Should the contributor of a translation update send in a software grant
for each update? --We haven't been asking for that, but if we should do
that we will.
We're trying to avoid a situation that might look like commit-by-proxy.
thanks,
-jean
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: Question about handling external updates to contributed files
Posted by "Jean T. Anderson" <jt...@apache.org>.
Sam Ruby wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 6:05 PM, Jean T. Anderson <jt...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> rats, my post is crossing with Rick's titled "blanket software grant". Feel
>> free to respond to his.
>>
>
> Others have responded to Rick's question, but let me add something to yours:
>
>
>> -jean
>>
>> Jean T. Anderson wrote:
>>
>>>
<snip />
>>> We're trying to avoid a situation that might look like commit-by-proxy.
>>>
>
> http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt, section 4, explicitly allows
> for what you are calling commit-by-proxy; while simultaneously
> encouraging employees to talk to their employer. Should the employer
> feel that they may have a claim on the contribution, a CCLA would make
> sense.
>
>
Thanks for the clarification, Sam. I mostly hear negative views of
commit by proxy. :-) It's good to have a positive viewpoint highlighted.
In other words, used with judicious care, it can be perfectly fine.
-jean
>>> thanks,
>>>
>>> -jean
>>>
>
> - Sam Ruby
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
> only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
> constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
> and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
> official ASF policies and documents.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: Question about handling external updates to contributed files
Posted by Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net>.
On Wed, Jul 30, 2008 at 6:05 PM, Jean T. Anderson <jt...@apache.org> wrote:
> rats, my post is crossing with Rick's titled "blanket software grant". Feel
> free to respond to his.
Others have responded to Rick's question, but let me add something to yours:
> -jean
>
> Jean T. Anderson wrote:
>>
>> A question has come up on derby-dev about the correct handling of the
>> re-contribution of translated message files.
>>
>> IBM included translated message files in the original derby software
>> grant.
>>
>> We all understand that our ICLAs cover work on any source files we
>> committers work on at Apache. Committers are updating the English message
>> files in the Apache svn repo, but they aren't updating the translated files.
>> For later releases, IBM and Sun have updated the translations and
>> contributed them back to the project.
>>
>> Should the contributor of a translation update send in a software grant
>> for each update? --We haven't been asking for that, but if we should do
>> that we will.
>>
>> We're trying to avoid a situation that might look like commit-by-proxy.
http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt, section 4, explicitly allows
for what you are calling commit-by-proxy; while simultaneously
encouraging employees to talk to their employer. Should the employer
feel that they may have a claim on the contribution, a CCLA would make
sense.
>> thanks,
>>
>> -jean
- Sam Ruby
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
Re: Question about handling external updates to contributed files
Posted by "Jean T. Anderson" <jt...@apache.org>.
rats, my post is crossing with Rick's titled "blanket software grant".
Feel free to respond to his.
-jean
Jean T. Anderson wrote:
> A question has come up on derby-dev about the correct handling of the
> re-contribution of translated message files.
>
> IBM included translated message files in the original derby software
> grant.
>
> We all understand that our ICLAs cover work on any source files we
> committers work on at Apache. Committers are updating the English
> message files in the Apache svn repo, but they aren't updating the
> translated files. For later releases, IBM and Sun have updated the
> translations and contributed them back to the project.
>
> Should the contributor of a translation update send in a software
> grant for each update? --We haven't been asking for that, but if we
> should do that we will.
>
> We're trying to avoid a situation that might look like commit-by-proxy.
>
> thanks,
>
> -jean
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
> only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
> constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
> and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
> official ASF policies and documents.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org
>
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DISCLAIMER: Discussions on this list are informational and educational
only. Statements made on this list are not privileged, do not
constitute legal advice, and do not necessarily reflect the opinions
and policies of the ASF. See <http://www.apache.org/licenses/> for
official ASF policies and documents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: legal-discuss-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: legal-discuss-help@apache.org