Re: Missing ‘or’ in CLA

[Henri Yandell <flamefew@gmail.com>]

Thanks Michael.

Should I read the text as a logical OR or an AND?

ie) does EDK2 feel the current text is unchanged in effect from the Apache
ICLA or that the text is intentionally changed in effect from the Apache
ICLA so that both clauses apply on each contribution?

Thanks,

Hen

On Fri, Sep 14, 2018 at 5:38 PM Kinney, Michael D <
michael.d.kinney@intel.com> wrote:

> Hi Hen,
>
> Thanks for the feedback.
>
> After review, we do not think this change is required.
>
> If there are other reasons to update the agreement in the
> future, we can include this update at that time.
>
> Mike
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: edk2-devel [mailto:edk2-devel-bounces@lists.01.org]
> > On Behalf Of Henri Yandell
> > Sent: Friday, September 14, 2018 3:35 PM
> > To: Leif Lindholm <leif.lindholm@linaro.org>
> > Cc: Justen, Jordan L <jordan.l.justen@intel.com>; edk2-
> > devel@lists.01.org; Andrew Fish <afish@apple.com>; Cetola,
> > Stephano <stephano.cetola@intel.com>; Kinney, Michael D
> > <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>; Laszlo Ersek
> > <lersek@redhat.com>
> > Subject: Re: [edk2] Missing ‘or’ in CLA
> >
> > 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
> > <flamefew@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 4:08 AM Leif Lindholm
> > <leif.lindholm@linaro.org>
> > > 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 ‘or’ 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 well,
> > >> > 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’s not a harmful change for those who did notice that
> > the meaning of the
> > > original Apache ICLA has changed. I postulate that the
> > majority assumed it
> > > had the same meaning as the Apache ICLA and agreed to
> > that instead.
> > >
> > > Hen
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > edk2-devel mailing list
> > edk2-devel@lists.01.org
> > https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel
>