Thanks to Justin Harringa, Mark Waite and Coleen Waite for testing the EasyCLA process on the https://github.com/jenkinsci-infra-ircbot-test/test-easycla repository. We have reported a few minor issues discovered during testing, but overall the process works pretty well.
I suggest going ahead and enabling individual CLAs for a number of repositories within jenkinsci. I suggest taking peripheral repos, because we need to figure out company CLAs and have all key maintainer permissions before enabling EasyCLA for the Jenkins core. I suggest voting for enabling Easy CLA in the Jenkins core next week Best regards, Oleg On Tuesday, June 8, 2021 at 9:13:36 AM UTC+2 Oleg Nenashev wrote: > Hi all, > > Just a quick update on the pending project: > > - At the Governance meeting in April we agreed to proceed with > exploring EasyCLA > - We submitted a request to the Linux Foundation. After several > iterations, we agreed to keep EasyCLA management as a part of the CDF > account for now. It technically allows all individuals and contributor > companies to sign a single CLA for all projects, and then moderate where > they contribute by company CLA and internal guidelines > - I have got an access yesterday so that I am able to configure > EasyCLA for Jenkins > - I set up a test repository in > https://github.com/jenkinsci-infra-ircbot-test/test-easycla and > enabled EasyCLA for it. I also enabled branch protection there, and it > works well. Anyone welcome to try out the new process by submitting pull > requests to the repository. > > I will proceed with a process JEP to document the current state. Any > feedback is welcome! > > Best regards, > Oleg > > > On Thursday, April 8, 2021 at 8:00:14 PM UTC+2 Oleg Nenashev wrote: > >> Hi all, >> >> Just in case, you can find some notes from the EasyCLA webinar and >> Jenkins-specific questions from the webinar here >> <https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1vy8riAfqzaW-PmvNIK0N6btHq2d4MYA81DKDPqWhrKU/edit?usp=sharing> >> . >> Slides and the Video will be published soon by the Linux Foundation. >> >> Best regards, >> Oleg >> >> >> On Friday, April 2, 2021 at 4:12:31 PM UTC+2 Oleg Nenashev wrote: >> >>> Hi all, >>> >>> Quick progress update: >>> >>> - I have reached out to the Linux Foundation legal to clarify the >>> CLA requirements. At the moment there is no strict guidelines how >>> projects >>> should use CLA/DCO, and there are projects using neither of them. Apart >>> from the potential legal risks (e.g. MIT License does not cover patent >>> grant listed in our CLA for the submitted code), the Jenkins community >>> can >>> proceed as is. >>> - I plan to setup the EasyCLA PoC so that the current contributors >>> could try it out and see whether the process is convenient enough. Then >>> we >>> can discuss changes in the CLA policy. >>> - I have submitted an application form to create a Jenkins account >>> on Easy CLA. Once it is created, I will share the permissions with the >>> Jenkins governance board members >>> >>> For your information, there will be also a webinar about EasyCLA on >>> April 8th: >>> https://linuxfoundation.org/webinars/lfx-easycla-streamline-your-development-workflow/ >>> >>> . It could be a good venue to ask any questions or to share our feedback. >>> >>> Best regards, >>> Oleg Nenashev >>> >>> >>> >>> On Wednesday, March 24, 2021 at 8:11:05 AM UTC+1 Oleg Nenashev wrote: >>> >>>> Thanks for the insights Andrew! >>>> >>>> I agree that DCO could be a good compromise for the Jenkins core and >>>> related repositories. >>>> I am not sure about plugin repositories, I'd guess we should make it >>>> optional though recommended for the repositories. >>>> >>>> Best regards, >>>> Oleg Nenashev >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Tue, Mar 23, 2021, 23:10 Andrew Grimberg < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 3/23/21 2:54 PM, Oleg Nenashev wrote: >>>>> >> I don’t think that we should go this way. Kohsuke always tried to >>>>> keep >>>>> > the barrier for contributions very low and I think we should continue >>>>> > this way. I think that we would not have so many plugins (or PRs for >>>>> > plugins) if we make the contribution process more complex >>>>> > >>>>> > I would prefer to avoid setting extra boundaries as well. At the same >>>>> > time, it makes sense to review the current model with the LF legal >>>>> team. >>>>> > Right now we indeed avoid the contribution obstacles, but effectively >>>>> > common code contributors and plugin maintainers do not sign CLA. It >>>>> may >>>>> > cause some legal loopholes, especially in the terms of the patent >>>>> right >>>>> > which is not covered by the MIT License used in Jenkins. Not that I >>>>> > expect any real issues with that, but maybe there is a way to be on >>>>> the >>>>> > safe side with minimum impact on contributors. >>>>> >>>>> I'm not legal council for LF, but since I do work with several of the >>>>> projects at LF I can give you some perspective. That being said, >>>>> talking >>>>> with legal is still a good idea! >>>>> >>>>> There's one hard and fast thing that I can recommend and that's to >>>>> require DCO (Signed-off-by) on all changes coming in. If the DCO Probot >>>>> is not setup on the GitHub org, it should be and enabled as a required >>>>> check on all repositories. >>>>> >>>>> That's the lowest bar that legal is going to tell you that you really >>>>> need to do. >>>>> >>>>> After that, CLAs are a thing that some of our projects use and others >>>>> don't. Those that don't, just stick with DCO. >>>>> >>>>> Since you already have CLAs in play on some repos, legal is likely to >>>>> push for you to go all out and make it a blanket thing. That being >>>>> said, >>>>> EasyCLA can be configured to only be required on some repos and not >>>>> all, >>>>> so that really is going to come down to what you as a project want. >>>>> >>>>> -Andy- >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Andrew J Grimberg >>>>> Manager Release Engineering >>>>> The Linux Foundation >>>>> >>>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Developers" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/f7528c47-2a58-4fe1-ada6-f62bea9ced1en%40googlegroups.com.
