On Sat, 5 Feb 2011 20:42:54 -0500 Christopher Petrilli <petri...@amber.org> wrote: > On Sat, Feb 5, 2011 at 1:23 PM, Mike Meyer > <mwm-keyword-googlegroups.620...@mired.org> wrote: > > On Sat, 5 Feb 2011 00:09:41 -0500 > > Christopher Petrilli <petri...@amber.org> wrote: > >> For example, the following projects REQUIRE contributor agreements, in > >> writing, signed and either scanned or on paper, prior to accepting any > >> patches or commits: > >> > >> - Free Software Foundation > >> - Apache, and everything under it > >> - Python > > I'm sorry, I'm going to call foul on this. I've contributed to Python > > without ever signing a CA. And the current developers guide page > > doesn't have anything on it about needing to sign a CA. > I do not know when you contributed, or whether it was before this > period, but from
Certainly possible. My largest contributions were docs, which don't ship with Python and would be excluded. > http://wiki.python.org/moin/PythonSoftwareFoundationLicenseFaq: > > > If your code is going to end up in Python or the standard library, the PSF > > will require you to: > > * License your code under an acceptable open source license. These > > currently include only the Academic Free License and the Apache License > > 2.0, although this list may be expanded in the future. (No, the PSF License > > is not acceptable; see below) > > * Fill out and submit a contributor agreement. > > Perhaps they exclude some small amount of code in the form of patches, > but it certainly applies to libraries, etc. You can find the > contributor agreement here: > http://www.python.org/psf/contrib-form.html It's not that different > than the one for Clojure. Again, I'm not arguing whether it's a "good > thing" or not, simply that it's actually not as unheard of as people > think, nor is it poorly founded in US legal precedent. I find it odd that they don't mention this on the Developers Guide at http://www.python.org/dev/ or the developers FAQ at http://www.python.org/dev/faq/. Possibly this is a reflection of reality, in that most contributions will be small patches or docs that don't ship, and they don't enforce it until they want to include a library. Or maybe this was planned but never actually happened. I know that it's never been talked about on any of the Python lists I've hung out on. > > Seriously, the "snail-mail" requirement is the only one that's really > > objectionable. Most places are quite happy with a scanned image of the > > signed document (i.e. - the Chickasaw nation for my citizenship > > papers). > Then perhaps someone can offer to Rich to accept the scanned copies > and deal with them? One of the "joys" of an open source project is not > just contributing code, but helping out with the administrative > overhead of running a project. Exactly what has to happen to a PDF that was emailed to whoever would have gotten the snail-mail copy, beyond printing and then treating like the snail-mail'ed one? <mike -- Mike Meyer <m...@mired.org> http://www.mired.org/consulting.html Independent Network/Unix/Perforce consultant, email for more information. O< ascii ribbon campaign - stop html mail - www.asciiribbon.org -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
