On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 5:37 PM, Greg Stein <gst...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, Oct 22, 2015 at 6:45 AM, Jim Jagielski <j...@jagunet.com> wrote: > >> First and foremost, I have not followed this thread almost at >> all. I've been at ATO2015 and then traveling. >> >> What I will say, whether it has been said or not, that >> as VP Legal, I will work w/ the Incubator on whatever issues >> or questions they may have. If it's time for a conversation >> between VP Legal and Incubator re: IP clearance, one that >> has not happened for at least a decade, iirc, then I am >> fine with that as well and am ready to do so. > > Please read the thread: it contains my part of that conversation that I > think needs to happen.
I'll summarize my position as situations requiring special IP Clearance procedures (i.e., not a simple patch or even a committer making a huge change, but events such as bulk importing code that was previously hosted publicly elsewhere) are infrequent enough events and important enough risks that having a second set of eyes (from outside of the receiving PMC) is in order. I don't have a strong opinion as to whether IP Clearance for podlings and PMCs should be managed separately or together. As long as it continues to be done via lazy consensus, I also don't see burden. > Thx, > -g - Sam Ruby --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
