SGTM. On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 9:11 PM Sean Owen <so...@cloudera.com> wrote:
> Yeah, this is why this pops up when you open a PR: > https://github.com/apache/spark/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md > > Mostly, I want to take all reasonable steps to ensure that when > somebody offers a code contribution, that they are fine with the ways > in which it actually used (redistributed under the terms of the AL2), > whether or not they understand the intricacies. In good faith, I'm all > but sure that all contributors either think they're giving the > contribution to the project anyway, or at least, do understand it to > be their own work licensed under the same terms as all of the project > contributions are. > > IANAL, but in stricter legal terms, the project license is plain and > clear, and the intricacies are signposted and easy to read when you > contribute. You would have a very hard time arguing that you made a > contribution, didn't state anything about the license, but did not > intend somehow that the work could be licensed as the rest of the > project is. For reference Apache projects do not in general require a > CLA. > > On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 8:59 PM, Nicholas Chammas > <nicholas.cham...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I've seen many other OSS projects ask contributors to sign CLAs. I've > never > > seen us do that. > > > > I assume it's not an issue, since people opening PRs generally understand > > what it means. But legally I'm sure there's some danger in taking an > > implied vs. explicit license to do something. > > > > So: Do we need to make people sign contributor CLAs? > > > > I'm betting Sean Owen knows something about this... :) > > > > Nick >
