Hello Loren,

Wednesday, August 25, 2004, 9:32:26 PM, you wrote:

>> The version 2 Apache license has some text allowed "trivial" contributions
>> to not require CLAs -- but then, what's the definition of "trivial"? we
>> haven't got a really good definition of that as it applies to rules yet,
>> unfortunately ;)

LW> I'd suggest as a lower limit that a contribution of a single rule ought to
LW> be 'trivial' in the CLA sense, even if it does happen to tag 50% of the spam
LW> and no ham.

A rule like
> header T_DOUBLE_USCORES  Subject =~ /__/
yes.  A rule that had seven or eight negative look-aheads, eight or nine
character classes, and nine or ten alternatives, might be the type of
rule that requires a CLA.

I'm more concerned with the method of submission. If a single rule is
submitted with the intent that it be available to the entire community,
that's good for me. If we don't know that, however, it's possible the
submitter /meant/ it to be available to individual systems that are doing
their own anti-spam work, but does *not* want it to be included in any
distribution that will be incorporated into and then sold as a commercial
product.

That's why I'm trying to track authorship of the SARE rules I manage, so
we can find out whether the original author has any objections to full
SA distribution if/when appropriate.

Bob Menschel



Reply via email to