<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Apr 13, 2009 at 4:44 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:martin@v.loewis.de">martin@v.loewis.de</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
> * What is the scope of a patch that requires a contributor<br>
> agreement?<br>
<br>
Van's advise is as follows:<br>
<br>
There is no definite ruling on what constitutes "work" that is<br>
copyright-protected; estimates vary between 10 and 50 lines.<br>
Establishing a rule based on line limits is not supported by<br>
law. Formally, to be on the safe side, paperwork would be needed<br>
for any contribution (no matter how small); this is tedious and<br>
probably unnecessary, as the risk of somebody suing is small.<br>
Also, in that case, there would be a strong case for an implied<br>
license.<br>
<br>
So his recommendation is to put the words<br>
<br>
"By submitting a patch or bug report, you agree to license it under the<br>
Apache Software License, v. 2.0, and further agree that it may be<br>
relicensed as necessary for inclusion in Python or other downstream<br>
projects."<br>
<br>
into the tracker; this should be sufficient for most cases. For<br>
committers, we should continue to require contributor forms.</blockquote><div><br>Sounds great to me.<br><br>Cheers,<br>Tobias<br></div></div><br>