[Freeipa-devel] CLA or contribution policy?

[Dmitri Pal]

Karsten Wade wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 29, 2009 at 12:37:10PM -0400, Dmitri Pal wrote:
>   
>> Karsten Wade wrote:
>>     
>>> Recently when I was asking around about the contributor license
>>> agreement (CLA) that covers FreeIPA, the Legal man asked, "What does
>>> the FreeIPA project want?  Do they want a full-blown CLA or would a
>>> simpler contribution policy do?"  By asking ourselves this question,
>>> we have a chance to resolve (be happier) about the current CLA, get it
>>> changed to a more useful agreement, or switch entirely to a
>>> declarative policy of some kind.
>>>   
>>>       
>> I might be wrong but I do not think anyone looked at the problem this way.
>>     
>
> I believe you are right.  When FreeIPA was forming, the folks in Legal
> handling it were new to Red Hat and took a reasonable (I think)
> approach of re-using the Fedora CLA.
>
>   
>> Some good guidance on the matter will be helpful.
>>     
>
> There have always been some folks who cannot or will not
> sign/click-agree to a CLA, regardless of how easy it is.
>
> Do any of you have stories about the FreeIPA CLA that you can share?
> Any positive or negative experiences?
>
>   
I think there was a case when a person was not interested in
contributing due to the need to sign CLA.
And I think there have been couple people who signed CLA and added to
the project by providing valuable information and guidelines that are
now published on the wiki.

-- 
Thank you,
Dmitri Pal

Engineering Manager IPA project,
Red Hat Inc.


-------------------------------
Looking to carve out IT costs?
www.redhat.com/carveoutcosts/