Mobile mail.. sorry for brevity... Doesn't the ICLA Graham has previously filed with the ASF already compel him to make no contribution unless those conditions are met?
After a decade is there any reason to believe he would act in contradiction to his sworn ICLA? Sorry if you find this fatigueing or my humor irritating. Laughing at ourselves can be healthy medicine and inspiring to come to more sensible and less silly written policy. I'm quite finished being angry or irritated over such issues :) -----Original message----- From: Graham Leggett <minf...@sharp.fm> To: Sam Ruby <ru...@intertwingly.net> Cc: "William A. Rowe Jr." <wr...@rowe-clan.net>, dev@httpd.apache.org, legal-disc...@apache.org, Eric Covener <cove...@gmail.com>, "Roy T. Fielding" <field...@gbiv.com>, Simon Lucy <simon.l...@bbc.co.uk> Sent: Wed, Mar 28, 2012 13:21:47 GMT+00:00 Subject: Re: [RE-VOTE #3] adoption of mod_combine subproject On 28 Mar 2012, at 1:02 PM, Sam Ruby wrote: > Cut out the drama. It is not helpful here. > > The simple question is whether or not Graham has met the conditions specified > in section 3 and 4 of the ICLA: > > http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt > > Answer that in the affirmative, and you are done. - I have a signed ICLA on file. - I am a PMC member. - The contribution was submitted to the ASF bugzilla by the BBC directly (ie not someone in their personal capacity), which forces account holders to agree to the following condition: "Certify that any object code, source code, patch, documentation, etc. that you may supply to an Apache project can be redistributed under the same license terms and conditions as the project itself." - The contribution was made after a BBC-internal process was followed to sign off and clear the code for donation. Can someone provide for me any concrete reason to suspect that the conditions in 3 and 4 might not have been met? Regards, Graham --
