On Wed, Sep 28, 2011 at 12:44 PM, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote:
<snip> > Honestly, I see clear answers from legal-discuss for only a small > fraction of the questions that are submitted. I don't know if we're > misusing that list or what. But it does not appear to operate like a > list where you submit a questions and get a definitive answer in a > finite period of time, It's is a sign that demand exceeds capacity :-/ The last time we were this busy, the contributions of a small number of lawyers (at major tech companies) really made the difference. Looks like they've drifted away. If anyone knows a lawyer who might be interesting in contributing, then please ask them to join the list. I recommend noting the slow response from legal-discuss as an impediment in the next podling report (to let the board know). > Do Mentors have have an idea on whether we're approaching these > questions the right way? (I'm not a mentor but please forgive give me for jumping in) Apache is sometimes described as a do-ocracy. Submitting patches is the path to karma. > In particular, should be forcing the questions by proposing a > categorization and seeking lazy consensus? For example, "If there are > no objections within 3 days to treating the Boost Licence as Category > A compatible, then we assume lazy consensus and go forward with that > treatment" Dennis seems clueful :-) If he were to start proposing patches to complement his analysis, that would increase the probability that someone would apply them (by reducing the time required to implement the policy clarification). Robert
