On Tue, Jan 12, 2010 at 6:47 PM, Gianugo Rabellino <[email protected]> wrote:
> [...] Although I would > argue that no one pointed out the scary elephant in the room, that is > the fact that it is unclear whether David intended to contribute his > code under the ICLA or under the AL. I'm still wary of signing off a > release where, at a very least, we have to force our hand and make a > decision on someone else's IP that while likely being licensed to us > properly, maybe it's not. I think it's quite clear that David is licensing his copyright under the CLA, not under the Apache license. To quote from his resignation email: "PS -- My resignation in no way abrogates any rights in the copywritten materials that I have licensed to the ASF under my CLA" It's possible that originally David was under the impression that the CLA license contained exactly the same restrictions as the Apache 2.0 license, which is not the case. However, I think he clarified that for himself, or more likely meant something entirely different than what was construed in the original discussion. In this case he's being painstakingly clear in his wording. Ethan
