Loren Wilton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'd suggest as a lower limit that a contribution of a single rule
> ought to be 'trivial' in the CLA sense, even if it does happen to tag
> 50% of the spam and no ham.
>
> 30 rules might be a different quesiton.
The "trivial" thing is an Apache guideline. Basically, if the
contribution is trivial, we're okay with relying on the Apache License
2.0 which includes this bit:
5. Submission of Contributions. Unless You explicitly state otherwise,
any Contribution intentionally submitted for inclusion in the Work
by You to the Licensor shall be under the terms and conditions of
this License, without any additional terms or conditions.
Notwithstanding the above, nothing herein shall supersede or modify
the terms of any separate license agreement you may have executed
with Licensor regarding such Contributions.
If it's non-trivial (and series of trivial contributions is generally
considered non-trivial), the ASF requires that we get a signed
Contributor License Agreement.
For the trivial case, I should also note that:
- Rules are often (usually?) not derivative works of SpamAssassin,
therefore the Apache license does not necessarily apply.
- The rules have to be intentionally submitted **to the ASF**.
Also, even if we know who wrote it and they submitted a CLA previously,
we still need them to okay or make the contribution. A CLA is not a
license for us to grab anything. :-)
One way to simplify the process of getting a new untested rule all the
way into the ASF would be to do new untested rule development in the ASF
rather than outside of the ASF. Once it's in the door and legally
kosher, any ASF project can use a contribution.
Daniel
--
Daniel Quinlan
http://www.pathname.com/~quinlan/
