On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 10:59 AM Richard Eckart de Castilho <r...@apache.org> wrote:
> Hi, > > > On 2. Apr 2024, at 16:40, Richard Eckart de Castilho <r...@apache.org> > wrote: > > > > I'll see if I find somebody on Slack to maybe provide more insight into > ICLA vs Section 5. > > So folks on the ASF Slack back both ;) Essentially it boils down to risk > management I guess. > > So this are my thoughts: > > If we accept contributions under Section 5 / without ICLA, we are at a > larger risk that the contribution may be contested. So we should not do > this for significant contributions - but > if somebody corrects a typo, fixes a trivial bug, etc. it might be > acceptable risk. > > If possible, an ICLA should be requested. > > In particular it must be provided before anybody actually may become a > committer. Thanks! If the GSoC gets awarded, I'll push for the contributor to sign a ICLA as they will be writing a fair amount of new code. My question came about from a pull request I received from a person applying. That's just code refactoring and will fit well under Sec. 5. Thanks again, P
