On 6/8/12 9:09 AM, Ross Gardler wrote: > My question is "is it necessary". See my overlapping post. > > Essentially, why is it perceived that an iCLA is needed for initial > contributions via Pootle. Aren't they roughly equivalent to patches via > bugzilla? Shouldn't we be working on the workflow to ensure contribution is > as easy as possible? >
+1, easy as possible is key here because we want to attract as much as possible volunteers. Juergen > Ross > > Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity. > On Jun 8, 2012 12:08 AM, "Dave Fisher" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> On Jun 7, 2012, at 3:43 PM, Kay Schenk wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton <[email protected] >>> wrote: >>> >>>> +1 on this discussion so far. >>>> >>>> I was skeptical but I favor how this is going. >>>> >>>> Also, the anonymous contribution to pootle is a no-no. >>>> >>>> - Dennis >>>> >>>> PS: Changing to the [DISCUSS] that is called for and to have it be >> visible. >>>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Rob Weir [mailto:[email protected]] >>>> Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 09:41 >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Subject: Re: *DRAFT FINAL* June board report >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 6:59 AM, Jürgen Schmidt >>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> On 6/7/12 12:10 PM, Ross Gardler wrote: >>>>>> On 7 June 2012 11:02, Jürgen Schmidt <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>> On 6/7/12 11:54 AM, Ross Gardler wrote: >>>>>>>> On 7 June 2012 10:47, Jürgen Schmidt <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 6/7/12 11:28 AM, Ross Gardler wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 7 June 2012 05:50, Herbert Duerr <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> ... >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> I think we maybe should add one more topic here: Working with >>>> pootle >>>>>>>>>>> currently requires committership, which results in translators >>>> having having >>>>>>>>>>> to be fast-tracked when they show up on the mailing list. The >>>> board needs to >>>>>>>>>>> decide if this short-circuiting of the process is desirable or >> not >>>> and what >>>>>>>>>>> the alternatives are. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> No, need, that's not a board level issue. It's up to the project >> to >>>> define its >>>>>>>>>> own expectations of committers. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> it's a very bad limitation. I would prefer a user management which >>>>>>>>> allows registration (by email verification) of new users and where >>>> new >>>>>>>>> users agree to contribute under the Apache license. Maybe combined >>>> with >>>>>>>>> an iCLA but not necessarily require to be committer. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> But I am not sure if something like that would be possible at all. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Otherwise we have to deal with the current approach and hope that >> we >>>> can >>>>>>>>> reach volunteers to accept this approach and work together with >> them >>>> on >>>>>>>>> a fast-track. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I agree that the limitation suboptimal. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I suggest someone take this up with legal-discuss@ If legal@ feel >>>> able >>>>>>>> to approve a more relaxed approach to iCLAs for access to Pootle >> then >>>>>>>> infra@ can be asked to find a technical solution. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I agree and thanks to remind me that I should take the appropriate >>>>>>> action to address things like that ;-) >>>>>> >>>>>> Careful with the "I" - madness lies that way ;-) >>>>>> >>>>>> This is the perfect opportunity for someone lurking here to make an >>>>>> early and potentially very significant contribution. Shepherding these >>>>>> kinds of actions takes time away from those embedded in the coding. >>>>>> It's a good way to earn merit while you figure out where to contribute >>>>>> to the project. If someone like that is reading but not sure how to >>>>>> proceed I'm sure others will help guide you. >>>>> >>>>> I agree but the idea is not really new and nothing happened so far ;-) >>>>> >>>>> Thinking more about it I would like to discuss a new term "Apache >>>>> contributor" where users can register for an user account by accepting >>>>> that all their contributions are under ALv2. The verification can be by >>>>> email verification and the iCLA can be required as well (details have >> to >>>>> be defined). With such accounts people would get access to more pubic >>>>> wikis (like our user wiki), tools like Pootle, bugzilla etc. >>>>> >>>> >>>> The "contributor" role at Apache already handles this. A contributor >>>> can already register in Bugzilla, post patches, register in the wiki, >>>> contribute documentation, etc. >>>> >>>> What a contributor cannot do is directly modify the product code in >>>> SVN. So they are in RTC mode with respect to product code, including >>>> translations. >>>> >>>> I think the disconnect here is we only have an anonymous method for >>>> contributors to add translations to Pootle. I can see the >>>> justification for requiring non-committers to submit translations as >>>> patches in BZ or via suggestions in Pootle. But the anonymous part of >>>> this is completely wrong, both from community and from legal >>>> standpoint. >>>> >>>> For example, those who contribute to Pootle, anonymously, see their >>>> contributions marked as being from "nobody" in the UI: >>>> https://translate.apache.org/projects/OOo_34/ >>>> >>>> Isn't that rather insulting? >>>> >>> >>> [reposted since I didn't see this topic change] >>> >>> yes, it is...I thought Juergen was suggesting that some special >> submission >>> access if you will be granted to the Pootle server. >> >> As in we would like to be able to allow people with an iCLA on file to >> register for access to the pootle server. >> >> We can call these people "invited translators" >> >> Should we add a line to the podling report - for the IPMC and board's >> attention? >> >> Regards, >> Dave >> >>> >>> >>>> It also makes it very difficult for the PMC to do their job, since we >>>> cannot effectively track top contributors and nominate them for >>>> committership of the work is all by "nobody". >>>> >>>> From legal perspective, we're failing to track where our contributions >>>> are coming from. We're losing the provenance of the translations by >>>> not associating translation contributions with a user ID/email >>>> address. >>>> >>>> -Rob >>>> >>> >>> >>> What I see here are some "non-standard" submissions in the Apache sense >>> emerging in OpenOffice. I was alluding to this in a post I made the other >>> day, but didn't specify anything. Using the Pootle server is a perfect >>> example of such a case. >>> >>> Maybe we can take this up with the Board after graduation? -- and see >> what >>> can be done. I can't imagine that some new methods can't be enacted. >>> >>> >>>>> The difference between contributors and committers would be that only >>>>> committers get the @apache.org email address. >>>>> >>>>> I think that a such lightweight user could be useful and the license >>>>> question of their contributions would be clear form the beginning. >>>>> >>>>> Juergen >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> MzK >>> >>> "Everything will be all right in the end... >>> if it's not all right then it's not the end. " >>> -- Sonny, "The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel" >> >> >
