Furkan, Thank you for your reply. The first link is pretty hard to follow, but the 2nd link is clearer, once I found the full thread of that message.
The key is the quote from Greg Stein, which explains the mechanism: What is important is to understand the ICLA says you have the rights to apply the change. In this case, it is assumed you have been given the rights by the contributor who opened the PR, since they opened it. Permission can also be assumed under clause 5 of the ALv2. So what is *really* happening is that the *committer* is marked as pushing the change, and is (thus) responsible for it, it falls under their ICLA, and the ASF legal umbrella applies to that committer. The contributor is marked in git as the author (which is distinct from the pusher). That paragraph means we're keeping copies of everything on our servers. Cheers, Lee. On Sat, May 9, 2020 at 6:28 PM Furkan KAMACI <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi Lee, > > One answer will be sufficient for your all questions: > > *Only committers need to sign ICLA, not non-committers.* > > You can check an explanation from here: > > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-infrastructure-dev/201112.mbox/%[email protected]%3E > > Here is a recent discussion which is similar to your question: > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/re4cc7218280706dfccfe2a0b64944d5a90a15850400a7eb92c8c0069%40%3Clegal-discuss.apache.org%3E > > By the way, feel free to ask any questions to @legal, especially > related to "PRs can be trivial or huge" part. > > Kind Regards, > Furkan KAMACI > > On Sun, May 10, 2020 at 3:52 AM leerho <[email protected]> wrote: > >> This is a question the one of our Mentors should be able to answer: >> >> I have been studying the following ASF documents: >> >> - Contributor Agreements >> <http://apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html> >> - Roles <http://apache.org/foundation/how-it-works.html#roles> >> - CLA-FAQ <https://www.apache.org/licenses/cla-faq.html> >> >> The Contributor Agreements page states: >> >>> "The ASF desires that all contributors of ideas, *code*, or >>> documentation to any Apache projects complete, sign, and submit via email >>> an Individual Contributor License Agreement (ICLA)." ("desires" is a >>> rather weak word here) >> >> >> The Roles page states: >> >>> A *developer* is a user who contributes to a project in the form of >>> *code* or documentation. ... Developers are also known as >>> *contributors* . >> >> and >> >>> A *committer* is a developer that was given write access to the code >>> repository and has a signed Contributor License Agreement (CLA) >>> <http://www.apache.org/licenses/#clas> on file. ... >> >> >> This seems to imply that a *developer / contributor* does *not* need to >> sign an ICLA in order to contribute *code*, which appears to be in >> conflict with what is stated on the Contributor Agreements page. >> >> I also looked on the CLA-FAQ page, hopefully to find answers to what I >> consider some of the most obvious questions about ICLAs. I did not find any >> of these addressed: >> >> - Does anyone (and everyone) who submits a PR (even trivial edits) >> to a project have to have signed an ICLA on record, before we can accept >> the PR? >> - PRs can be trivial or huge, where do we draw the line (if there is >> a line)? >> - How is this supposed to be managed? Are project committers supposed >> to ask anyone who submits a PR if they have a signed ICLA on record? >> - Is it generally the case that employees of corporations and >> graduate students of universities have to ask permission of their employer >> or university to sign an ICLA? >> >> Cheers, >> >> Lee. >> >> >> >>
