On Fri, 2012-02-17 at 17:16 -0600, Greg Reddin wrote: > I think it's great that Morten is contributing this and I'd like to > see it get in. We need to make sure of the provenance of it though. I > think he should attach the patch to Jira so we can have a legal > reference of his contribution.
That's quite an interesting point you bring up Greg. Forking github and contributing patches that way bypasses the confirmation of "Grant license to ASF for inclusion in ASF works"... How are other Apache projects tackling this? The point of github is to make it a lot easier to bring in contributions. Is it possible to make this process more efficient avoiding creating custom patches? GitHub has no ability provide this question during the pull request process AFAIK. http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/hc-dev/201201.mbox/%3C1327013195.2472.10.camel@ubuntu%3E Is one solution to ask the contributer to add the comment to the pull request: "I grant license to Tiles for inclusion in Tiles works (as per the Apache License ยง5)" ? This seems like the approach Cloudera is taking with Sqoop. https://github.com/cloudera/sqoop/wiki/DevelopmentProcess Another approach would be if Jira's "Attach Files" process could be applied to an identical "Attach Pull Request" where a link to the pull request is provided instead of an attachment file. Again i don't know if this is possible...? There are other interesting questions github introduces, eg naming and trademarks. http://www.g-loaded.eu/2011/03/01/forking-apache-licensed-software-on-github-and-bitbucket/ ~mck -- "Each and everyone of us are Angels with only one wing. We need to hold on to each other befor we can fly." Leo F. Buscaglia | http://github.com/finn-no | http://tech.finn.no |
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
