Just wanted to reply to one specific point: On 15/01/2016 14:55, "Peter Kelly" <pmke...@apache.org> wrote:
>I felt were unreasonable - the inability to accept pull requests from >anyone without first asking them to sign a CLA Who in particular told you this? I occasionally see communities operating under this misguided assumption and it frustrates me and I try and correct it whenever I see this The Apache License contains Clause 5 (Submission of Contributions) which says the following: "Unless You explicitly state otherwise, any Contribution intentionally submitted for inclusion in the Work by You to the Licensor shall be under the terms and conditions of this License, without any additional terms or conditions. Notwithstanding the above, nothing herein shall supersede or modify the terms of any separate license agreement you may have executed with Licensor regarding such Contributions." So basically anything anyone that intentionally submits something to your project for inclusion (and it's pretty clear that a pull request is an intentional submission) then it is fair game for inclusion in an Apache Licensed project without the need for any separate agreement. Now for large contributions (where large is arbitrarily defined by the accepting community) there may be a desire to always get a CLA but it is a fallacy to say that a ICLA is always required. As a corollary if someone is making large contributions they should be a candidate for committer and/or PMC status and if they were to be granted committer status then the ASF requires they have a ICLA on file Rob --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
