Missing ‘or’ in CLA

Missing ‘or’ in CLA

[Henri Yandell]

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.

Thanks,

Hen

Re: Missing ‘or’ in CLA

[Laszlo Ersek]

Mike,

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.

Thanks
Laszlo

Re: Missing ‘or’ in CLA

[Henri Yandell]

As patch text (sorry, was on a phone for the first email and forgot I could
generate the patch from GitHub via url):

>From 86403de1826e3bcf860497c69141b40082ec56a5 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: Henri Yandell <hyandell@users.noreply.github.com>
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2018 22:31:39 -0700
Subject: [PATCH] Adding missing 'or'

When the CLA was created from the Apache ICLA, the option for a CCLA
was removed. When this was done the 'or' was lost in the text. This
puts it back in so that you represent that you have received
permission __or__ your employer has waived such rights.
---
 Contributions.txt | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/Contributions.txt b/Contributions.txt
index f34626912a4..7859435c175 100644
--- a/Contributions.txt
+++ b/Contributions.txt
@@ -201,7 +201,7 @@ title, and interest in and to Your Contributions.
   license. If your employer(s) has rights to intellectual property
   that You create that includes Your Contributions, You represent
   that You have received permission to make Contributions on behalf
-  of that employer, that Your employer has waived such rights for
+  of that employer or that Your employer has waived such rights for
   Your Contributions.
 * You represent that each of Your Contributions is Your original
   creation (see Section 4 for submissions on behalf of others).


On Fri, Aug 31, 2018 at 12:30 PM Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com> wrote:

> Mike,
>
> 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.
>
> Thanks
> Laszlo
>

Re: Missing ‘or’ in CLA

[Leif Lindholm]

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

Re: Missing ‘or’ in CLA

[Henri Yandell]

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


>

Re: Missing ‘or’ in CLA

[Henri Yandell]

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
>
>
>>

Re: Missing ‘or’ in CLA

[Kinney, Michael D]

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

Re: Missing ‘or’ in CLA

[Henri Yandell]

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
>

Re: Missing ‘or’ in CLA

[Kinney, Michael D]

Hen,

Current language should be read as an OR.

Mike

From: Henri Yandell [mailto:flamefew@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, September 14, 2018 8:25 PM
To: Kinney, Michael D <michael.d.kinney@intel.com>
Cc: Andrew Fish <afish@apple.com>; Cetola, Stephano <stephano.cetola@intel.com>; Justen, Jordan L <jordan.l.justen@intel.com>; Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>; Leif Lindholm <leif.lindholm@linaro.org>; edk2-devel@lists.01.org
Subject: Re: [edk2] Missing ‘or’ in CLA

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<mailto: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<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<mailto:leif.lindholm@linaro.org>>
> Cc: Justen, Jordan L <jordan.l.justen@intel.com<mailto:jordan.l.justen@intel.com>>; edk2-
> devel@lists.01.org<mailto:devel@lists.01.org>; Andrew Fish <afish@apple.com<mailto:afish@apple.com>>; Cetola,
> Stephano <stephano.cetola@intel.com<mailto:stephano.cetola@intel.com>>; Kinney, Michael D
> <michael.d.kinney@intel.com<mailto:michael.d.kinney@intel.com>>; Laszlo Ersek
> <lersek@redhat.com<mailto: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<mailto:flamefew@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 4:08 AM Leif Lindholm
> <leif.lindholm@linaro.org<mailto: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<mailto:edk2-devel@lists.01.org>
> https://lists.01.org/mailman/listinfo/edk2-devel