[cle-release-team] [sakai-pmc] Managing CLA's with new contributions

[Anthony Whyte]

-1  Circling back.  I do not agree with this approach.  It introduces fuzzy logic that at some point could catch us out.

>> One suggestion from Dr. Chuck is that at some point a "patch" becomes a contribution when it includes new significant IP rather than just fixing 
>> a bug or glitch and that it is up to those who have commit privileges to make sure not to commit something large from a person that does not have a CCLA.  Does everyone agree with this characterization?


In my opinion, a signed iCLA needs to be on file before we accept a code contribution, irrespective of its size or character.  It's a simple rule and not all that hard to enforce.

anthony whyte | its and mlibrary | university of michigan | arwhyte at umich.edu | 517-980-0228


On Mar 12, 2014, at 4:39 PM, Kirschner, Beth wrote:

> +1
> 
> This makes sense to me. Everyone who reviews and commits patches should make a judgement call on whether or not the patch constituties significant "intellectual property"  or just a bug-fix/minor-enhancement. When in doubt, we should ask.
> 
> - Beth
> 
> On Mar 12, 2014, at 4:32 PM, Neal Caidin <neal.caidin at apereo.org> wrote:
> 
>> [Sakai PMC and Sakai Core Team]
>> 
>> Howdy folks,
>> 
>> I've been trying to get my brain wrapped around how to best manage 
>> incoming contributions and CLAs. From talking (virtually) with the 
>> Apereo Licensing group and based on the Apereo licensing documentation 
>> [1] , it seems that the spirit or intention is that small fixes do not 
>> need CLA's but larger and more complex contributions do need CLA's 
>> (corporate Contributor License Agreements - CCLA's ; and individual 
>> Contributor Licenses - iCLA's).
>> 
>> One suggestion from Dr. Chuck is that at some point a "patch" becomes a 
>> contribution when it includes new significant IP rather than just fixing 
>> a bug or glitch and that it is up to those who have commit privileges to 
>> make sure not to commit something large from a person that does not have 
>> a CCLA.  Does everyone agree with this characterization?
>> 
>> [1] Apereo licensing documentation - http://www.apereo.org/licensing
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Neal
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Neal Caidin
>> Sakai Community Coordinator
>> Apereo Foundation
>> neal.caidin at apereo.org
>> Skype me! (but let me know in advance for the first interaction) - nealkdin
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> sakai-pmc mailing list
>> sakai-pmc at collab.sakaiproject.org
>> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai-pmc
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sakai-pmc mailing list
> sakai-pmc at collab.sakaiproject.org
> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai-pmc

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://collab.sakaiproject.org/pipermail/cle-release-team/attachments/20140317/aa63d59b/attachment.html