[Incubator] Feedback from gt2 on contributors agreement.

[Jody Garnett]

Arnulf Christl wrote:
> Chris Holmes wrote:
>> So I sent out an email to geotools about the contributors agreement 
>> (we're electing the official rep on monday, but I wanted to get 
>> feedback on this sooner rather than later).
>>
>> One question just looks like a good one for the FAQ:
>> Does this mean that before I can accept and commit a patch submitted 
>> to me by a non-committer, they must submit a signed copy of the 
>> agreement to the foundation? Or would it fall under the copy of the 
>> agreement that I will sign?
>>
>>
>> And the other is likely a bit more involved:
>> 'Three words:
>> Public domain contributions.
>>
>> Failure to accept them excludes all interaction with the US Federal
>> Government.'
>>
>> Basically all federal employees _must_ release their work under 
>> public domain.  This is then obvioiusly able to be re-assigned, but 
>> if a contributor is working for the US government, then they can't 
>> release their work like directly to the foundation to be licensed 
>> under a more restrictive license.  In GeoTools I think we just let 
>> Bryce add a public domain license.  But it'd be great if we could get 
>> the real legal answer as to how to handle contributions from US gov 
>> employees.
>>
>> best regards,
>>
>> Chris
>
> Did you ever get an answer to this one?
Not a great answer, its seems that the work is in the public domain so 
the foundation does not need much in the way of permission to defend it 
legally.  However there were some "edge" cases I am still not sure on. I 
still think we needed to treat Bryce special for some reason (well he 
*is* special he understands ISO specs for me).

Jody