On 8/22/12 9:40 AM, Katherine Marsden wrote:
I received a notice that as part of the Friday Jira "upgrade" we will
be using the Apache license plugin. I am not sure why, but I guess
that means that we should be extra careful to get an ICLA or
explicit license in a Jira comment for every patch, even very simple
ones.
Kathey
Hi Kathey,
It looks like we all missed the discussion of this change. A clarifying
discussion is now happening on the infrastructure mailing list under the
subject "Upcoming JIRA Upgrade". Here's what Doug Cutting has just said:
"Contributions to Apache-licensed software are under the terms of the
license by default:
http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0.html#contributions
The only purpose of the checkbox was to permit folks to attach things
that were *not* intended to be contributions. The same thing can be
accomplished without the checkbox by stating in a comment that the
attachment is not intended for contribution."
Here is the passage from the Apache license cited by Doug:
"5. Submission of Contributions. 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."
I tend to agree with Doug. We should assume that all contributions are
licensed to Apache unless the contributor explicitly says otherwise. I
don't see the need for requiring an explicit grant in every attachment
comment.
Thanks,
-Rick
