On Wed, Nov 14, 2012 at 1:57 PM, jan iversen <jancasacon...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 in general to your ideas, it would be VERY nice to have an easy way, and > the more we all do to make it easy the more developers will work for both > projects. I do however have one question. > > Regarding the mark #AOOCONTRIBUTION. It an AOO committer take the code and > integrate it, would that not be a clear violation of the ICLA paragraph 7. > As I read it, taking code requires a lot of extra red tape, compared to if > someone actively sends the code and asks a committer to integrate it ? > > I might be wrong, but from past experience with apache, taking source that > has not clearly been sent with the purpose of integration, can lead to > problems. Remember it is not easy to proof who actually set the flag, > whereas a mail sent is a clear indication. >
I agree that this would only work if we know that the patch author set the flag. But this can be done via normal means. If you recall, I didn't ask for your fingerprints or a DNA sample before integrating your patches ;-) Unless shown otherwise I hope we can assume that no one is committing fraud, like editing someone else's commit to add a tag to it. -Rob > Jan I > > > > On 14 November 2012 19:28, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote: > >> I've heard some discussion and interest in this topic off-list. There >> has been some practical experience, but nothing that we've written >> down or promoted. I'd be interested in seeing if we can come up with >> some solid best practices. >> >> The problem: Many (most?) open source contributors are not opposed to >> AOO or LO. They are just interested in helping out. If they produce >> a patch, or documentation, fix a bug or add a translation, they want >> to maximize the public good that comes from that work. License >> differences are confusing and frustrating and bring them no joy. They >> want a set of clear instructions for how they can do the most good >> with the least process overhead. >> >> Naturally, I'm looking at this from the AOO side. But most of these >> issues are symmetrical. So for sake of argument, suppose I identify >> myself primarily as a LibreOffice developer/translator/technical >> author, and I want to make my work available more broadly. What >> should I do? As I see it, the issues are threefold: communications, >> technical integration and license. >> >> On the communications side, how do I let AOO know that I've done work >> that I want to contribute to them? Sending a note to dev@ or posting >> a patch in AOO's BZ would work, of course. But both require extra >> work for the contributor. Are there any lighter weight ways of doing >> this? For example, could we suggest a tag that could be used in git >> or Bugzilla, for the contributor to indicate their intent that the >> contribution be made available to AOO as well? Something like >> #AOOCONTRIBUTION ? That would make it easy for us to search for such >> items. >> >> Technical integration -- Due to divergence between the projects, not >> every LO patch can be applied to AOO automatically. Some will, but >> many will require adaptation. Certainly the contributor could >> integrate and build their patch for both products. That would be >> idea. But it is asking a lot. Would we accept less? Or maybe we >> sugest areas where technical integration would be easier and require >> no extra work? Otherwise, integration would require extra work on our >> end. But this is not fatal. In fact it could lead to a set of "easy >> tasks" for new developers. >> >> License -- the differences here are well-known, but are easily solved. >> A contributor merely needs to state that they are making their patch >> available to AOO under ALv2. There are various ways to record this >> fact publicly. One is to make the statement in the source system (git >> or BZ). But that is extra work. Another way might be submit an iCLA >> to Apache. Another way might be to publicly record an intention on >> our dev@ list, along the lines of, "All of my (future/past) >> LibreOffice contributions should be considered also contributions >> under the Apache License 2.0 to the Apache OpenOffice project". >> >> Another other ideas? >> >> -Rob >>
