On Fri, Aug 7, 2009 at 8:45 AM, Curt Arnold<[email protected]> wrote: > > On Aug 7, 2009, at 1:23 AM, Paul Davis wrote: > >> A few shapeless and incomplete thoughts leap to mind: >> >>> >>> As previously mentioned, the JIRA does have an checkbox to indicate that >>> a >>> contribution is intended as a contribution. That is intended as a >>> reinforcement (or an explicit refutation) of the implied license for >>> things >>> posted on the mailing lists or in Bugzilla (which lacks the checkbox). >>> The >>> implied license for contributions comes from item 5 in the ASL. >>> >>> >>> 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. >>> >> >> As I read this, anyone that submits a patch to me on github has >> granted ASF license to that contribution unless they specifically >> state that their contribution was not intended for inclusion. Its >> still my ass on the line as a committer if I put something in SVN that >> violates this agreement. The radio button on JIRA is not an absolute >> requirement for inclusion. > > They have granted you (the Licensor in the case of a project fork which work > on github looks like)
I fail to see how having code on Github is any more of a fork than my local checkout of the SVN repository. > a license to use the code under the ASL. That would > give you the rights to relicense it to the ASF. However, the ASF loses the > record of the initial contribution. The ASF would be unlikely be covered if > there was a problem since the ASF relied on your assertion that it was your > original work, however you would be on the line and the project and users > could suffer. > The rest is roughly my point. The ASF requires that I act appropriately when committing code. The only issue here is that if I accept a patch on Github then the ASF has no log of the original author's contribution. This applies to wherever I receive code contributions though. So if we want to address the underlying issue of providence and logging submissions perhaps we should consider how that could be improved? HTH, Paul Davis
