From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received-SPF: Pass (sender SPF authorized) identity=mailfrom; client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2b; helo=mail-io1-xd2b.google.com; envelope-from=flamefew@gmail.com; receiver=edk2-devel@lists.01.org Received: from mail-io1-xd2b.google.com (mail-io1-xd2b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::d2b]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ml01.01.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5AC7921130E72 for ; Fri, 14 Sep 2018 15:35:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by mail-io1-xd2b.google.com with SMTP id v14-v6so7278400iob.4 for ; Fri, 14 Sep 2018 15:35:11 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=OT7GJUuSEoWihv1OO+G86sTGCEzylf/fduLnMElUgwM=; b=ZIyePcWsq86nVy1//SI+jVKEAqdYTYi9CxiFu3b8u00C1PMtav3/66RxQBpx+iRLwr Aq2kJLy1ZW2JiGbbd0aU338w5vAnxrxdPi/jbsG83gFXb8lCL/JX8eepKqZmlKlEeTyv ZwNxRvF8qk9ZQKlBfonSOI9Qav9Sh0899cHokEEEoy8wCD4QBEqkx+RPV/p7z47hoJHp AWGpoHdx91AadEl7bb2CAVBmEPP45dswYAIPxYw/9yxTM3J7Um94AcWUeElTreWofX3P tuSZvS8O02JhvbcJGK1uhbFcpkZI65yjXOWUUUbnwqmn0XBF92lCdgrlw/a1aDmyxLbN WMHA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=OT7GJUuSEoWihv1OO+G86sTGCEzylf/fduLnMElUgwM=; b=p/GjU6QduD0saP/IV8cjgOlesU2zH+b//Niov8/1txqLw6ccE0NTUMpu/OHmfnfElf 6RoTyIQPnwLJlvmKJZmBbJyAvXXHbbtrf1qvj7rlPWGl4UwG2QxzF/aFsJAZazgxraXl Ho3HYF0HNVy/c25MpDcJ3lEbKQ3h+JaB8se3w83lj5U3Ji9lbCl23xdmyb8+sEr7DItk caI7YDJMdeZTZVH6r+XPjVyd6hdQr6WMZzKFuE/a7pxABfYTb86oAQ6EtLH1AAKsJ4Xp TR6sxz7+1fCXzLJ9PHZsFeBUe7PoMXF8olg/Ng+6+J015kKyrPBq0ty6L1ta33JqN+Cf g8PA== X-Gm-Message-State: APzg51DgacG1M/58uJ0zWuP/xMaE9mCg6/9jauyw+uq7p2fIvP9QhzAB EDuew5WbRML/Ud0hEU9NCO3U6wbVREHIRcoxTA0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ANB0VdbZ0HBnGonvGYa9NQ7TU+EXRplxyiznm/nonLZj/NQVK7SCx/7RJ7w4WxGMXgMwxyBVngPozdu8OtGgdVRPjAc= X-Received: by 2002:a6b:b44e:: with SMTP id d75-v6mr12429002iof.63.1536964510454; Fri, 14 Sep 2018 15:35:10 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <20180903110852.xxm4enjitebmisbf@bivouac.eciton.net> In-Reply-To: From: Henri Yandell Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2018 15:34:59 -0700 Message-ID: To: Leif Lindholm Cc: Andrew Fish , "Cetola, Stephano" , "Jordan Justen (Intel address)" , Laszlo Ersek , Michael Kinney , "edk2-devel@lists.01.org" X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.29 Subject: =?UTF-8?B?UmU6IE1pc3Npbmcg4oCYb3LigJkgaW4gQ0xB?= X-BeenThere: edk2-devel@lists.01.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: EDK II Development List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 14 Sep 2018 22:35:11 -0000 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Apologies for the nudge. I was wondering if anyone had had a chance to ponder this? Thanks, Hen On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 2:44 PM Henri Yandell wrote: > > > On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 4:08 AM Leif Lindholm > wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 09:30:31PM +0200, Laszlo Ersek wrote: >> > On 08/31/18 01:58, Henri Yandell wrote: >> > > The CLA is missing an =E2=80=98or=E2=80=99 in section 3. >> > > >> > > See https://github.com/tianocore/edk2/pull/133/files for an example >> of the >> > > specific text. >> > >> > could you please turn this report into a real patch (if the suggested >> > change is valid)? Technically it's easy enough so I could do it as wel= l, >> > just so we have something to review on the list, but: >> > - I have no idea if the suggested change is valid, >> > - I wasn't around when "Contributions.txt" was originally invented. >> >> Would this require a revision bump to 1.2? >> >> Whether a valid correction or not, it changes the premises under which >> certain organisations have confirmed they are happy to contribute. >> Moreso in my eyes than the change that lead to the bump to 1.1. >> >> / >> Leif > > > Just as my tuppence - it relaxes rather than tightens the conditions, so > it=E2=80=99s not a harmful change for those who did notice that the meani= ng of the > original Apache ICLA has changed. I postulate that the majority assumed i= t > had the same meaning as the Apache ICLA and agreed to that instead. > > Hen > > >>