Yup - though that subjectivity comes from copyright law rather than the ASF. Here's my attempt at a simpler flowchart than the JIRA issue really provides:
Non-subjective: * Any contribution to an Apache-2.0 licensed file made back to our projects is under Apache-2.0 unless the contributor says otherwise (in which case, flag it). Note that GitHub's terms also reinforce that if the contribution is being made on GitHub. * Committers must sign ICLAs. Simple, not very subjective, rule: * Submitting new files not based on an existing ASF project file require an ICLA. Subjective modifier to that: * Not needed if we're talking about a very simple new file. Hen On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 4:18 AM Matthew Benedict de Detrich <[email protected]> wrote: > My understanding is also the same, i.e. if a change is considered complex > then an ICLA is required. The problem is that the definition of complex can > be considered largely subjective and falls under the "common sense" > mentality. > > On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 12:53 PM Claude Warren, Jr > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > For something like this, where you have a few lines of code to fix a bug > a > > ICLA is not required. If someone is contributing a fix/change that is > > "complex" then an ICLA is recommended. If they are contributing a new > > package or extension and ICLA is required. > > > > On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 11:16 AM Johannes Rudolph < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Relevant JIRA issue: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LEGAL-615 > > > (which in summary is about as confused as I am :)) > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 23, 2023 at 12:09 PM Johannes Rudolph > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > Echoing PJ's relevant response at > > > > https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko-http/pull/14 > > > > > > > > > In practice, ASF projects don't collect CLAs from every user who > > > submits a PR. There is no magic criterion for what makes a PR > significant > > > enough to require one but the PR changes 70 files, even if the changes > > are > > > not very large. > > > > > > > > It's hard to gather relevant information here. As stated above the > > > > Apache site linked prominently on the Apache website says that a CLA > > > > is required for any kind of contribution in very clear language: > > > > > > > > > All contributors of ideas, code, or documentation to any Apache > > > projects must complete, sign, and submit via email an Individual > > > Contributor License Agreement (ICLA). > > > > > > > > On the other hand Roy Fielding himself said this in > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread/0mytpqj7too29bj90yz65rggdv7gd35d: > > > > > > > > > Again, there is no such requirement for commits/pushes at Apache. > > > > > The person responsible for moving the bits into our repository > > > > > is responsible for verifying that they have the right to do so > > > > > before the push is made. The authors do not need to have a CLA > > > > > on file even if the contribution is massive -- CLAs are only > > > > > required for the people who want an account at Apache and thus > > > > > are allowed to make the decision to push those bits into our > > > > > repository. > > > > > > > > Which says almost exactly the opposite, in fact, that no > non-committer > > > > contribution ever needs a CLA. Is that thinking outdated by now? > > > > > > > > Searching through the Flink and Kafka Github repos it seems that the > > > > topic has almost never come up in a PR (low single digit number of > > > > total occurrences, though you cannot trust Github search). Where it > > > > came up, mostly when complete modules where contributed. > > > > > > > > I tend to get the impression that we should *not* require a CLA in > > > > general from external contributors but (in spirit of what Roy > Fielding > > > > wrote) we might want to add a section to the PR template that makes > it > > > > clear that a contribution was done under the terms of the APL2. > > > > > > > > Johannes > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Matthew de Detrich > > *Aiven Deutschland GmbH* > > Immanuelkirchstraße 26, 10405 Berlin > > Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B > > Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen > > *m:* +491603708037 > > *w:* aiven.io *e:* [email protected] >
