Hi Jukka, it seems to me that the IP-Clearance on gene...@incubator got lazy consensus. Should we raise a RESULT email? Any further steps needed I can help with? (According to Marshall's previous email it seems the answer is no) Cheers. Tommaso
2010/2/28 Jukka Zitting <jukka.zitt...@gmail.com> > Hi, > > On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 4:41 PM, Marshall Schor <m...@schor.com> wrote: > > I recall reading also, that since the clearance says the headers have > > been properly converted to Apache license headers, and that that work > > (of editing those files) is often done in SVN because the submitted zip > > may not have everything in order, that it's OK to commit the new code > > base to SVN. > > There's recently been a case where the author of a codebase that he > contributed to an Apache project didn't realize that the software > grant implies the change of license headers (and thus the removal of > his own "Copyright (c) ..." statements on individual files). This > ended up in a rather messy situation and cost the project quite a lot > of time and effort to resolve. > > The lessons learned have probably not yet reached the relevant > documentation, but going forward it would probably be a good idea to > ask the contributor to change the license headers (or at least > explicitly approve the header change) already before the contributed > code gets committed. > > > Of course, it's not OK to do this before a software grant has been > > received/recorded/ack. > > > > And, of course, it's not OK to "release" this software before the IP > > clearance. > > Yep. The release point is the definite line where all the legal bits > should be in order. > > BR, > > Jukka Zitting >
