Guys I'll sign the Icla (this it? http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt) to clear any potential worries up. Honestly didn't even know about it till this email chain. How would I get it to y'all?
On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 8:26 PM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> wrote: > Ok I'm sorry I misunderstood. If needed I would think that we can get icla's > from the nic people. As far as gbarton, he sent a pull request via github and > commented about it on the issue in jira. That's the only record of intent to > contribute the code. > > Aaron > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Aug 31, 2012, at 7:55 PM, Tim Williams <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 7:27 PM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> wrote: >>> Just to be clear, I want this completed so we can move on. So the >>> question is do I need to get iCLA's from everyone that has ever >>> committed / contributed code to blur? When if they are not committers >>> in the Apache project? Let me know what you want me to do. >> >> To be clear, my question isn't holding *anything* up - it's just a >> question. We can proceed as usual - incubation is about sorting out >> these issues and frankly, I'm just not sure exactly how this one >> should be handled. >> >>> On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 7:21 PM, Aaron McCurry <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> dbarton == gbarton >>>> >>>> He's the only non-NIC employee, I will reach out to the others. I >>>> kinda understand why we would need iCLA's from the people that have >>>> committed, but technically gbarton has not committed. I committed his >>>> patch, git can have a different committer from author. I'm ok with >>>> getting an iCLA from these people if it's necessary, but they >>>> committed code to Blur before it was Apache. I have excepted >>>> gbarton's code after it was Apache, but he doesn't have committer >>>> status on the github project. If we need him to fill out a iCLA, I >>>> feel like he should be made a committer or is the iClA needed if you >>>> contribute as well? The reason I ask is because my code has been >>>> excepted into other Apache projects without iCLA on record. >> >> Since Blur was ALv2 before bringing it here maybe section 5 of the >> license is enough. I don't know, I'm hoping another mentor will help >> out here. Personally, I think it'd be good to get some >> acknowledgement that they intended to contribute it. >> >> Your previous patches have been accepted by other projects likely >> because of the "checkbox" that indicated your intent to contribute >> them. That checkbox was wildly misunderstood, likely unnecessary >> [because of Section 5 I mention above] and recently removed. In any >> case, this shouldn't slow things down at all, just a question... >> >> Thanks, >> --tim
