Thank you all for your replies. I just printed and will send the ICLA anyway so that it will not be an impediment for applying this or future patches.
@Vincent I will be happy to make any clarification related to the patch. But it would be transparent if there is a comment on the issue or an email at any FOP mailing list so that I can get feedback. Alexios Giotis On Feb 28, 2012, at 7:19 PM, Glenn Adams wrote: > benson, thanks for that clarification, i see in [1] that though an ICLA is > not required of a contributor, it is nevertheless desirable to have one > submitted; so, Alexios, if you wish to submit an ICLA please do so; however, > given the limited scope of the patch, I would agree that it is not strictly > required, and the lack of one should not impede applying the patch > > glenn > > [1] http://www.apache.org/licenses/#clas > > On Tue, Feb 28, 2012 at 10:05 AM, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> > wrote: > an icla is not required for a patch attached to a bz unless it is of unusual > size or not coded be the bz submitter. > > > On Feb 28, 2012, at 11:53 AM, Glenn Adams <gl...@skynav.com> wrote: > >> I support committing this patch, however I don't see an ICLA listed at [1] >> for Alexios. Alexios, if you have not submitted an ICLA [2], please do so. >> >> I would be happy to apply the patch (if Mehdi doesn't have the time). >> >> [1] http://people.apache.org/committer-index.html#unlistedclas >> [2] http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt >
