Thanks Justin, yes the person voting -1 had a concern that the ACS doesn't end up having repositories that don't get any participation/development. It's mitigated by the fact that there are contributors who have shown interest and want to maintain, develop and release under ACS. They also confirmed that -1 wasn't a binding vote.
Regards. On Wed, 28 Apr, 2021, 12:40 pm Justin Mclean, <jus...@classsoftware.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Thanks for replying, are you with ASF legal? > > > I help out there (and currently assistant VP), but I’m not a lawyer or > anything like that. > > Hashicorp CTO and their management agreed over email, which I could > forward over our public lists or ask them to send a confirmation on the > voting thread. I think the codebase is owned by a company (Hashicorp), do > we need the company to agree to the license change or all the contributors > irrespective? This is the repository > https://github.com/hashicorp/terraform-provider-cloudstack > > > Normally code like this would come in via a software grant [1] and have an > IP check. > > I also see there was one -1 vote, did the person go into any more detail > to why they voted -1? > > Thanks, > Justin > > 1. https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html#grants > 2. https://incubator.apache.org/ip-clearance/ > > >
