On Sun, Nov 27, 2011 at 9:05 PM, Joe Schaefer <joe_schae...@yahoo.com> wrote: >> From: Robert Burrell Donkin <robertburrelldon...@gmail.com>
<snip> >> Any legal issue serious enough to VETO a release would require code >> access to be blocked and all discussions taken private. Anything short >> of this isn't a VETO. > > I wouldn't go that far. I mean if a podling is trying to ship GPL code or > hasn't > completed its IP checklist, it shouldn't be releasing software from the ASF > yet. Those aren't issues that require privacy. +1 in principle But in practice, this tends to be about managing legal risk to the foundation. In order to get time to allow our counsel to give legal advice, infra would probably be asked (by the legal VP or a group of 3 committee members) to block access whilst the internal legal and board decide how to sort out the mess. (Or at least that's the way it's worked in the past.) Quite a big stick, which makes VETO a tough call to make. For me, shipping GPL code or incomplete IP check would be -1 but not VETO issues. For me, examples of serious legal issues would be an email threatening legal action if a release goes ahead but even this is controversial. Robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: general-unsubscr...@incubator.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: general-h...@incubator.apache.org
