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

[Karsten Wade]

On Wed, Aug 05, 2009 at 07:50:12AM -0400, 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

> > 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.

OK, I'll propose it to sssd-devel so the discussion sticks with the
active developers.

> 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.

Actually, the Fedora account system (FAS) only requires username, real
name, email address, and a check for "I am 13 years of age or older."

This is why Fedora Hosted works as a true upstream hosting solution.
Your contributor policy is entirely in your project's hands.

In a different scenario, if SSSD were to have it's own, stand-alone
CLA, we could create an 'sssd_cla' group in FAS.  People who had
signed the SSSD CLA would be added to that group, and not even need to
be in the Fedora Project CLA group 'cla_done'.

Back to this scenario, if we have a clear contribution policy page on
the wiki, that could cover the wiki potentially.  In MediaWiki, you
can change the template for the content that appears in 'edit page'
mode.  In the Fedora wiki, it reaffirms that the content is covered by
the CLA.  In Wikipedia, the wording is very similar to that of the
FreeIPA contrib policy I wrote up; I borrowed liberally. :)

> 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?

The only potential barrier is mental.  Interestingly, this is the
third or so conversation I've had in the last few days where folks
thought Fedora Hosted required a Fedora CLA - we may need to do some
marketing fixing there. :) As long as SSSD participants know the
facts, it should be an appropriate restriction, IMO.

- Karsten
-- 
Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Community Gardener
http://quaid.fedorapeople.org
AD0E0C41
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/freeipa-devel/attachments/20090807/541d2d49/attachment.sig>