[Freeipa-devel] contribution policy update, what's next

[Rob Crittenden]

Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On 08/04/2009 05:58 PM, Karsten Wade wrote:
>> Yesterday I lurked on a call with Stephen Gallagher and Richard
>> Fontana, legal expert on FLOSS licensing.
>>
>> Due to audio problems, I wasn't able to fully participate, but I did
>> hear an implicit agreement to the contribution policy draft I wrote
>> up.
>>
>> I think it may need a few tweaks; I'm going to propose some and get
>> Richard back on the phone to get an explicit OK from him.
>>
>> Stephen -- since SSSD has it's own upstream space, do you want me to
>> work up a draft contribution policy for there?  That is, I know your
>> licensing questions are still open, but we can get a draft with
>> alternate endings depending on potential outcomes.
>>
> 
> Yes, that would be a good next step.
> 
>> == What's next ==
>>
>> With the CLA requirement removed, next I have to enumerate exactly
>> where it stands as a barrier and figure out how to remove it.  There
>> are some other technological barriers to reconsider.
>>
>> For any system we require a CLA for e.g. fedorahosted.org access, that
>> is just a human check process, right?  We remove the CLA requirement
>> when considering people for SCM access.
>>
>> For patches, we need to figure out how to structure it so that people
>> can contribute patches via this list with it clear the patch is
>> submitted under the contribution policy.  Perhaps a single sentence +
>> URL at the beginning of each patch email?  It seems to me we could
>> also have people add themselves to a list via the wiki (history proves
>> the real user did it), and if you are on there, you don't need to
>> include the sentence in your patches.  Obviously a better solution is
>> needed, meaning we need to run our own directory or rely more upon an
>> external (e.g. Fedora Account System).  We might be able to get by
>> with OpenID, for example.
> 
> Editing the SSSD wiki already requires a Fedora account, so if we go
> with the "adding your name to a wiki page" idea, I think that's probably
> completely sufficient. On the other hand, having a Fedora account
> already implies that you have signed the Fedora CLA.
> 
>> For the wiki, we can remove the human requirement, but we still have a
>> technical barrier for entry.  It would be smoothest if people could:
>>
>> 1. Sign up for an account
>> 2. In that sign-up they read the contribution policy and agree to it
>>    as part of signing up
>> 3. They get wiki edit access
>>
>> All automatic with no human intervention required.
>>
>> Figuring out solutions there is my next important task once we have a
>> solid contribution policy to refer to.
>>
>> Meanwhile, if we can widen the field of people with "Create wiki users
>> upon request", that would be good.  I volunteer.  Maybe for now an
>> email request for access to a freeipa-* list would suffice?
>>
>> - Karsten
>>
> 
> Our present wiki comes to us through the Fedorahosted servers, and as
> such relies on the users having a Fedora account themselves. Do you feel
> that this restriction is to severe?
> 

I think he's referring to the freeIPA wiki.

rob
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/x-pkcs7-signature
Size: 3245 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/freeipa-devel/attachments/20090805/ac31a5eb/attachment.bin>