Module review: checking for missing/incorrect license headers, amending RAT exclusions, adding/changing license headers, removing trailing blanks.
IMHO: not sufficient IP to warrant requiring an ICLA. But as everyone else here says, t's always good to have an ICLA if you are planning on contributing. Craig > On Oct 3, 2017, at 7:59 AM, Emilian Bold <emilian.b...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> So I merged at least one or two commits already, just because they were > small enough. > > I agree. > > > --emi > > On Tue, Oct 3, 2017 at 5:54 PM, Matthias Bläsing <mblaes...@doppel-helix.eu> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Am Dienstag, den 03.10.2017, 16:47 +0200 schrieb Christian Lenz: >>> Because I asked for help in the slack chan to Review the modules, I >>> get a question: >>> >>> „is there any contribution agreement to sign?“ >>> >>> In General yes, but is this iCLA needed for module Review too? >> >> the work itself needs to be done and is valuable, but I don't see this >> reaching the level of creativity, that is needed for IP protection. >> >> So I merged at least one or two commits already, just because they were >> small enough. >> >> Greetings >> >> Matthias >> Craig L Russell Secretary, Apache Software Foundation c...@apache.org http://db.apache.org/jdo
