Be excellent - answer questions

[Jeroen van Meeuwen]

On Tue, 19 May 2009 10:23:20 -0400, "Tom \"spot\" Callaway"
<tcallawa at redhat.com> wrote:
> On 05/19/2009 10:08 AM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
>> Sorry, but I disagree. Remember, we already had ambassadors leaving the
>> project after the CLA changed. I don't share their concerns (otherwise I
>> had to resign, too), but I do see there are people not willing to sign
>> the current CLA which means they cannot get a FAS account.
> 
> This is a separate issue, lets not dogpile everything together
> unnecessarily. There are some legitimate issues with the current CLA
> that I am constantly working on resolving, but this is perhaps the most
> complicated legal matter currently on Fedora Legal's plate. Even with
> that, your statement that a CLA signature is required to get a FAS
> account is not accurate. It is necessary to sign the CLA to make a
> contribution to Fedora, but not simply to get a FAS account.
> 

Of which a very practical example is (public) mirror admins and mirror
managers of private downstream mirrors, who need a FAS account to log in
and administer their mirror in MirrorManager, but do not need to sign the
CLA.

--Jeroen