You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@juneau.apache.org by James Bognar <ja...@apache.org> on 2019/10/04 13:07:33 UTC
Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Question...
Do Outreachy candidates need to submit CLAs in order to make code contributions?
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>.
Sign a doc, save as PDF, email to secretary. Same way you’d sign via GPG or
by digitally drawing your signature onto the document.
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 16:38, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 5:26 PM Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > DocuSign is an accepted method of signing an ICLA. I updated the docs
> about
> > that a month or so ago.
> >
>
> Huh, I completely missed that section earlier, and didn't realize you
> had taken that step. Kudos!
> So aside from saying that we accept Docusign - how does a contributor
> get the docusign ICLA? Is there some button somewhere? While I see
> Docusign mentioned - I don't know how to be prompted to sign it.
> It's not obvious from this page:
> https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html and if I
> didn't know, I assume most people at the ASF, particularly those most
> likely to be inviting folks to join as a committer, don't know.
>
> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 15:11, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 1:43 PM Awasum Yannick <aw...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > For simplicity, all contributors in the context of Outreachy or GSoC
> > > should
> > > > just sign ICLAs when the submit first PRs. its going to make things
> very
> > > > easy for us and them in the long run.
> > > >
> > >
> > > While I agree with you in spirit, I think that this is going to be an
> > > entry in our friction log.
> > > Submitting an ICLA currently requires you to either print and scan, or
> > > gpg sign a document.
> > >
> > > So perhaps that's something we can improve - I know fundraising folks
> > > are already using Docusign to great ease and effect, and I am sure
> > > there are other options out there.
> > >
> > >
> > > --David
> > >
> > --
> > Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
>
--
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>.
Sign a doc, save as PDF, email to secretary. Same way you’d sign via GPG or
by digitally drawing your signature onto the document.
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 16:38, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 5:26 PM Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > DocuSign is an accepted method of signing an ICLA. I updated the docs
> about
> > that a month or so ago.
> >
>
> Huh, I completely missed that section earlier, and didn't realize you
> had taken that step. Kudos!
> So aside from saying that we accept Docusign - how does a contributor
> get the docusign ICLA? Is there some button somewhere? While I see
> Docusign mentioned - I don't know how to be prompted to sign it.
> It's not obvious from this page:
> https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html and if I
> didn't know, I assume most people at the ASF, particularly those most
> likely to be inviting folks to join as a committer, don't know.
>
> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 15:11, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 1:43 PM Awasum Yannick <aw...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > For simplicity, all contributors in the context of Outreachy or GSoC
> > > should
> > > > just sign ICLAs when the submit first PRs. its going to make things
> very
> > > > easy for us and them in the long run.
> > > >
> > >
> > > While I agree with you in spirit, I think that this is going to be an
> > > entry in our friction log.
> > > Submitting an ICLA currently requires you to either print and scan, or
> > > gpg sign a document.
> > >
> > > So perhaps that's something we can improve - I know fundraising folks
> > > are already using Docusign to great ease and effect, and I am sure
> > > there are other options out there.
> > >
> > >
> > > --David
> > >
> > --
> > Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
>
--
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 5:26 PM Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> DocuSign is an accepted method of signing an ICLA. I updated the docs about
> that a month or so ago.
>
Huh, I completely missed that section earlier, and didn't realize you
had taken that step. Kudos!
So aside from saying that we accept Docusign - how does a contributor
get the docusign ICLA? Is there some button somewhere? While I see
Docusign mentioned - I don't know how to be prompted to sign it.
It's not obvious from this page:
https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html and if I
didn't know, I assume most people at the ASF, particularly those most
likely to be inviting folks to join as a committer, don't know.
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 15:11, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 1:43 PM Awasum Yannick <aw...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > For simplicity, all contributors in the context of Outreachy or GSoC
> > should
> > > just sign ICLAs when the submit first PRs. its going to make things very
> > > easy for us and them in the long run.
> > >
> >
> > While I agree with you in spirit, I think that this is going to be an
> > entry in our friction log.
> > Submitting an ICLA currently requires you to either print and scan, or
> > gpg sign a document.
> >
> > So perhaps that's something we can improve - I know fundraising folks
> > are already using Docusign to great ease and effect, and I am sure
> > there are other options out there.
> >
> >
> > --David
> >
> --
> Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 5:26 PM Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> DocuSign is an accepted method of signing an ICLA. I updated the docs about
> that a month or so ago.
>
Huh, I completely missed that section earlier, and didn't realize you
had taken that step. Kudos!
So aside from saying that we accept Docusign - how does a contributor
get the docusign ICLA? Is there some button somewhere? While I see
Docusign mentioned - I don't know how to be prompted to sign it.
It's not obvious from this page:
https://www.apache.org/licenses/contributor-agreements.html and if I
didn't know, I assume most people at the ASF, particularly those most
likely to be inviting folks to join as a committer, don't know.
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 15:11, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 1:43 PM Awasum Yannick <aw...@apache.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > For simplicity, all contributors in the context of Outreachy or GSoC
> > should
> > > just sign ICLAs when the submit first PRs. its going to make things very
> > > easy for us and them in the long run.
> > >
> >
> > While I agree with you in spirit, I think that this is going to be an
> > entry in our friction log.
> > Submitting an ICLA currently requires you to either print and scan, or
> > gpg sign a document.
> >
> > So perhaps that's something we can improve - I know fundraising folks
> > are already using Docusign to great ease and effect, and I am sure
> > there are other options out there.
> >
> >
> > --David
> >
> --
> Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>.
DocuSign is an accepted method of signing an ICLA. I updated the docs about
that a month or so ago.
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 15:11, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 1:43 PM Awasum Yannick <aw...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > For simplicity, all contributors in the context of Outreachy or GSoC
> should
> > just sign ICLAs when the submit first PRs. its going to make things very
> > easy for us and them in the long run.
> >
>
> While I agree with you in spirit, I think that this is going to be an
> entry in our friction log.
> Submitting an ICLA currently requires you to either print and scan, or
> gpg sign a document.
>
> So perhaps that's something we can improve - I know fundraising folks
> are already using Docusign to great ease and effect, and I am sure
> there are other options out there.
>
>
> --David
>
--
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>.
DocuSign is an accepted method of signing an ICLA. I updated the docs about
that a month or so ago.
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 15:11, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 1:43 PM Awasum Yannick <aw...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > For simplicity, all contributors in the context of Outreachy or GSoC
> should
> > just sign ICLAs when the submit first PRs. its going to make things very
> > easy for us and them in the long run.
> >
>
> While I agree with you in spirit, I think that this is going to be an
> entry in our friction log.
> Submitting an ICLA currently requires you to either print and scan, or
> gpg sign a document.
>
> So perhaps that's something we can improve - I know fundraising folks
> are already using Docusign to great ease and effect, and I am sure
> there are other options out there.
>
>
> --David
>
--
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 1:43 PM Awasum Yannick <aw...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> For simplicity, all contributors in the context of Outreachy or GSoC should
> just sign ICLAs when the submit first PRs. its going to make things very
> easy for us and them in the long run.
>
While I agree with you in spirit, I think that this is going to be an
entry in our friction log.
Submitting an ICLA currently requires you to either print and scan, or
gpg sign a document.
So perhaps that's something we can improve - I know fundraising folks
are already using Docusign to great ease and effect, and I am sure
there are other options out there.
--David
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us>.
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 1:43 PM Awasum Yannick <aw...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> For simplicity, all contributors in the context of Outreachy or GSoC should
> just sign ICLAs when the submit first PRs. its going to make things very
> easy for us and them in the long run.
>
While I agree with you in spirit, I think that this is going to be an
entry in our friction log.
Submitting an ICLA currently requires you to either print and scan, or
gpg sign a document.
So perhaps that's something we can improve - I know fundraising folks
are already using Docusign to great ease and effect, and I am sure
there are other options out there.
--David
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
On GSoC, at least when I was heavily involved, we used to ask for ICLA from
accepted students...
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 16:49 Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> FWIW, for the projects I've mentored so far in Outreachy, I haven't
> asked anyone to submit an ICLA until they were accepted as the final
> candidates. I've also relied on whatever each OSS community's
> documentation says about when an ICLA should be submitted rather than
> blanket requesting them from any applicant. This was for both ASF and
> the Jenkins project. Some other communities rely on commit sign-offs
> [1] instead which are similar to signing the Apache ICLA regarding
> assertion of rights to contribute that code, and that's probably the
> lowest barrier to entry (just use `git commit -s` to enable it),
> though I haven't seen ASF use that approach.
>
> [1]: https://developercertificate.org/
>
> On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 13:36, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > IMO, signing the ICLA should not be a prerequisite for acceptance of a
> first PR. The first PR is unlikely to be a significant contribution.
> Hopefully at the end of the internship there is a significant contribution
> and by that time, the candidate has become comfortable enough to sign the
> ICLA. So yes, good idea to introduce the ICLA at the first PR, but I don't
> think it has to be a barrier, at least not right away.
> >
> > My 2 cents,
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 10/4/19, 10:59 AM, "Craig Russell" <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Awasum,
> >
> > I believe that you have exactly the right thinking on this subject.
> Details below.
> >
> > > On Oct 4, 2019, at 10:43 AM, Awasum Yannick <aw...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > For simplicity, all contributors in the context of Outreachy or
> GSoC should just sign ICLAs when the submit first PRs. its going to make
> things very easy for us and them in the long run.
> > >
> > Yes, having an ICLA on file for all candidates is a good thing.
> >
> > > So as soon as someone sends in their first PR, send them to fill
> an iCLA form and submit.
> >
> > This will make it easier to give the person the ability to commit
> later on if they deserve it.
> > >
> > > I wonder if this will add another barrier of entry? as people
> might get confused about why they need to do that or even be reluctant to
> fill the form an send.
> > >
> > Here's where diversity gets involved. We should review the FAQ on
> the license page and see if filling the ICLA might be a barrier to the
> people we want to attract.
> >
> > We should proactively look at the FAQ with this in mind and suggest
> changes if they are warranted.
> >
> > But if the ICLA is a barrier, it should go into the friction log
> with suggested changes.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Craig
> >
> > > Thanks.
> > > Awasum
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 5:33 PM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com
> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > > For more info, we have an FAQ here:
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.apache.org%2Flicenses%2Fcla-faq.html&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9d21049304dc4550116408d748f4a21c%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C1%7C637058087835364859&sdata=dyTMy%2FPsgDSQPlXnbHUTg4mHT2yUV8iZ7PzPWLNfS20%3D&reserved=0
> <
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.apache.org%2Flicenses%2Fcla-faq.html&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9d21049304dc4550116408d748f4a21c%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C1%7C637058087835364859&sdata=dyTMy%2FPsgDSQPlXnbHUTg4mHT2yUV8iZ7PzPWLNfS20%3D&reserved=0
> >
> > >
> > > I forgot to mention that CLAs also apply to patent grants (not many
> > > OSS licenses besides ALv2 and GPLv3 even address patents in scope
> of
> > > the license AFAIK), though this is more an issue for development
> done
> > > with corporate resources (I doubt many individuals bother filing
> > > software patents outside a business).
> > >
> > > On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 10:35, James Bognar <jamesbognar@apache.org
> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for the clarification.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:32 AM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com
> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > CLAs aren’t assigning copyright or anything. It’s asserting
> that you have the rights to the code being uploaded and are allowing the
> ASF to use it under the Apache License. For non-trivial contributions made
> by non-committers, it’s typically up to the PMC to decide whether they can
> vouch for the contribution themselves or if the contributor should sign an
> ICLA.
> > > > >
> > > > > Basically, the provenance of all code at Apache should be
> traceable to committers with an ICLA on file or an initial software grant
> from the corporation who donated the code base.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 10:22, James Bognar <
> jamesbognar@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Does that mean that I as a committer am legally responsible
> for
> > > > >> contributions accepted by non-committers? It's not my code,
> so how
> > > > >> can I grant copyright to it to the Apache Foundation?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Just curious.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:07 AM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com
> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Not necessarily. An ICLA is needed to become a committer,
> and any contributions accepted are committed by people who already signed
> the ICLA. It can make things easier in the long run to submit an ICLA,
> though.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 08:08, James Bognar <
> jamesbognar@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> Question...
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> Do Outreachy candidates need to submit CLAs in order to
> make code contributions?
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > --
> > > > >> > Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
> >
> > Craig L Russell
> > clr@apache.org
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
>
--
Sent from my Mobile device
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
On GSoC, at least when I was heavily involved, we used to ask for ICLA from
accepted students...
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 16:49 Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> FWIW, for the projects I've mentored so far in Outreachy, I haven't
> asked anyone to submit an ICLA until they were accepted as the final
> candidates. I've also relied on whatever each OSS community's
> documentation says about when an ICLA should be submitted rather than
> blanket requesting them from any applicant. This was for both ASF and
> the Jenkins project. Some other communities rely on commit sign-offs
> [1] instead which are similar to signing the Apache ICLA regarding
> assertion of rights to contribute that code, and that's probably the
> lowest barrier to entry (just use `git commit -s` to enable it),
> though I haven't seen ASF use that approach.
>
> [1]: https://developercertificate.org/
>
> On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 13:36, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.invalid> wrote:
> >
> > IMO, signing the ICLA should not be a prerequisite for acceptance of a
> first PR. The first PR is unlikely to be a significant contribution.
> Hopefully at the end of the internship there is a significant contribution
> and by that time, the candidate has become comfortable enough to sign the
> ICLA. So yes, good idea to introduce the ICLA at the first PR, but I don't
> think it has to be a barrier, at least not right away.
> >
> > My 2 cents,
> > -Alex
> >
> > On 10/4/19, 10:59 AM, "Craig Russell" <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Awasum,
> >
> > I believe that you have exactly the right thinking on this subject.
> Details below.
> >
> > > On Oct 4, 2019, at 10:43 AM, Awasum Yannick <aw...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > For simplicity, all contributors in the context of Outreachy or
> GSoC should just sign ICLAs when the submit first PRs. its going to make
> things very easy for us and them in the long run.
> > >
> > Yes, having an ICLA on file for all candidates is a good thing.
> >
> > > So as soon as someone sends in their first PR, send them to fill
> an iCLA form and submit.
> >
> > This will make it easier to give the person the ability to commit
> later on if they deserve it.
> > >
> > > I wonder if this will add another barrier of entry? as people
> might get confused about why they need to do that or even be reluctant to
> fill the form an send.
> > >
> > Here's where diversity gets involved. We should review the FAQ on
> the license page and see if filling the ICLA might be a barrier to the
> people we want to attract.
> >
> > We should proactively look at the FAQ with this in mind and suggest
> changes if they are warranted.
> >
> > But if the ICLA is a barrier, it should go into the friction log
> with suggested changes.
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Craig
> >
> > > Thanks.
> > > Awasum
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 5:33 PM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com
> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > > For more info, we have an FAQ here:
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.apache.org%2Flicenses%2Fcla-faq.html&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9d21049304dc4550116408d748f4a21c%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C1%7C637058087835364859&sdata=dyTMy%2FPsgDSQPlXnbHUTg4mHT2yUV8iZ7PzPWLNfS20%3D&reserved=0
> <
> https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.apache.org%2Flicenses%2Fcla-faq.html&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9d21049304dc4550116408d748f4a21c%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C1%7C637058087835364859&sdata=dyTMy%2FPsgDSQPlXnbHUTg4mHT2yUV8iZ7PzPWLNfS20%3D&reserved=0
> >
> > >
> > > I forgot to mention that CLAs also apply to patent grants (not many
> > > OSS licenses besides ALv2 and GPLv3 even address patents in scope
> of
> > > the license AFAIK), though this is more an issue for development
> done
> > > with corporate resources (I doubt many individuals bother filing
> > > software patents outside a business).
> > >
> > > On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 10:35, James Bognar <jamesbognar@apache.org
> <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Thank you for the clarification.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:32 AM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com
> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > CLAs aren’t assigning copyright or anything. It’s asserting
> that you have the rights to the code being uploaded and are allowing the
> ASF to use it under the Apache License. For non-trivial contributions made
> by non-committers, it’s typically up to the PMC to decide whether they can
> vouch for the contribution themselves or if the contributor should sign an
> ICLA.
> > > > >
> > > > > Basically, the provenance of all code at Apache should be
> traceable to committers with an ICLA on file or an initial software grant
> from the corporation who donated the code base.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 10:22, James Bognar <
> jamesbognar@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Does that mean that I as a committer am legally responsible
> for
> > > > >> contributions accepted by non-committers? It's not my code,
> so how
> > > > >> can I grant copyright to it to the Apache Foundation?
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Just curious.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:07 AM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com
> <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Not necessarily. An ICLA is needed to become a committer,
> and any contributions accepted are committed by people who already signed
> the ICLA. It can make things easier in the long run to submit an ICLA,
> though.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 08:08, James Bognar <
> jamesbognar@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> Question...
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> Do Outreachy candidates need to submit CLAs in order to
> make code contributions?
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > --
> > > > >> > Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
> >
> > Craig L Russell
> > clr@apache.org
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
>
--
Sent from my Mobile device
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>.
FWIW, for the projects I've mentored so far in Outreachy, I haven't
asked anyone to submit an ICLA until they were accepted as the final
candidates. I've also relied on whatever each OSS community's
documentation says about when an ICLA should be submitted rather than
blanket requesting them from any applicant. This was for both ASF and
the Jenkins project. Some other communities rely on commit sign-offs
[1] instead which are similar to signing the Apache ICLA regarding
assertion of rights to contribute that code, and that's probably the
lowest barrier to entry (just use `git commit -s` to enable it),
though I haven't seen ASF use that approach.
[1]: https://developercertificate.org/
On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 13:36, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> IMO, signing the ICLA should not be a prerequisite for acceptance of a first PR. The first PR is unlikely to be a significant contribution. Hopefully at the end of the internship there is a significant contribution and by that time, the candidate has become comfortable enough to sign the ICLA. So yes, good idea to introduce the ICLA at the first PR, but I don't think it has to be a barrier, at least not right away.
>
> My 2 cents,
> -Alex
>
> On 10/4/19, 10:59 AM, "Craig Russell" <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Awasum,
>
> I believe that you have exactly the right thinking on this subject. Details below.
>
> > On Oct 4, 2019, at 10:43 AM, Awasum Yannick <aw...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > For simplicity, all contributors in the context of Outreachy or GSoC should just sign ICLAs when the submit first PRs. its going to make things very easy for us and them in the long run.
> >
> Yes, having an ICLA on file for all candidates is a good thing.
>
> > So as soon as someone sends in their first PR, send them to fill an iCLA form and submit.
>
> This will make it easier to give the person the ability to commit later on if they deserve it.
> >
> > I wonder if this will add another barrier of entry? as people might get confused about why they need to do that or even be reluctant to fill the form an send.
> >
> Here's where diversity gets involved. We should review the FAQ on the license page and see if filling the ICLA might be a barrier to the people we want to attract.
>
> We should proactively look at the FAQ with this in mind and suggest changes if they are warranted.
>
> But if the ICLA is a barrier, it should go into the friction log with suggested changes.
>
> Regards,
>
> Craig
>
> > Thanks.
> > Awasum
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 5:33 PM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > For more info, we have an FAQ here: https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.apache.org%2Flicenses%2Fcla-faq.html&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9d21049304dc4550116408d748f4a21c%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C1%7C637058087835364859&sdata=dyTMy%2FPsgDSQPlXnbHUTg4mHT2yUV8iZ7PzPWLNfS20%3D&reserved=0 <https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.apache.org%2Flicenses%2Fcla-faq.html&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9d21049304dc4550116408d748f4a21c%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C1%7C637058087835364859&sdata=dyTMy%2FPsgDSQPlXnbHUTg4mHT2yUV8iZ7PzPWLNfS20%3D&reserved=0>
> >
> > I forgot to mention that CLAs also apply to patent grants (not many
> > OSS licenses besides ALv2 and GPLv3 even address patents in scope of
> > the license AFAIK), though this is more an issue for development done
> > with corporate resources (I doubt many individuals bother filing
> > software patents outside a business).
> >
> > On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 10:35, James Bognar <jamesbognar@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > >
> > > Thank you for the clarification.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:32 AM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > CLAs aren’t assigning copyright or anything. It’s asserting that you have the rights to the code being uploaded and are allowing the ASF to use it under the Apache License. For non-trivial contributions made by non-committers, it’s typically up to the PMC to decide whether they can vouch for the contribution themselves or if the contributor should sign an ICLA.
> > > >
> > > > Basically, the provenance of all code at Apache should be traceable to committers with an ICLA on file or an initial software grant from the corporation who donated the code base.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 10:22, James Bognar <jamesbognar@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Does that mean that I as a committer am legally responsible for
> > > >> contributions accepted by non-committers? It's not my code, so how
> > > >> can I grant copyright to it to the Apache Foundation?
> > > >>
> > > >> Just curious.
> > > >>
> > > >> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:07 AM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Not necessarily. An ICLA is needed to become a committer, and any contributions accepted are committed by people who already signed the ICLA. It can make things easier in the long run to submit an ICLA, though.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 08:08, James Bognar <jamesbognar@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Question...
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Do Outreachy candidates need to submit CLAs in order to make code contributions?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > --
> > > >> > Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
>
> Craig L Russell
> clr@apache.org
>
>
>
--
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>.
FWIW, for the projects I've mentored so far in Outreachy, I haven't
asked anyone to submit an ICLA until they were accepted as the final
candidates. I've also relied on whatever each OSS community's
documentation says about when an ICLA should be submitted rather than
blanket requesting them from any applicant. This was for both ASF and
the Jenkins project. Some other communities rely on commit sign-offs
[1] instead which are similar to signing the Apache ICLA regarding
assertion of rights to contribute that code, and that's probably the
lowest barrier to entry (just use `git commit -s` to enable it),
though I haven't seen ASF use that approach.
[1]: https://developercertificate.org/
On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 13:36, Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.invalid> wrote:
>
> IMO, signing the ICLA should not be a prerequisite for acceptance of a first PR. The first PR is unlikely to be a significant contribution. Hopefully at the end of the internship there is a significant contribution and by that time, the candidate has become comfortable enough to sign the ICLA. So yes, good idea to introduce the ICLA at the first PR, but I don't think it has to be a barrier, at least not right away.
>
> My 2 cents,
> -Alex
>
> On 10/4/19, 10:59 AM, "Craig Russell" <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Awasum,
>
> I believe that you have exactly the right thinking on this subject. Details below.
>
> > On Oct 4, 2019, at 10:43 AM, Awasum Yannick <aw...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > For simplicity, all contributors in the context of Outreachy or GSoC should just sign ICLAs when the submit first PRs. its going to make things very easy for us and them in the long run.
> >
> Yes, having an ICLA on file for all candidates is a good thing.
>
> > So as soon as someone sends in their first PR, send them to fill an iCLA form and submit.
>
> This will make it easier to give the person the ability to commit later on if they deserve it.
> >
> > I wonder if this will add another barrier of entry? as people might get confused about why they need to do that or even be reluctant to fill the form an send.
> >
> Here's where diversity gets involved. We should review the FAQ on the license page and see if filling the ICLA might be a barrier to the people we want to attract.
>
> We should proactively look at the FAQ with this in mind and suggest changes if they are warranted.
>
> But if the ICLA is a barrier, it should go into the friction log with suggested changes.
>
> Regards,
>
> Craig
>
> > Thanks.
> > Awasum
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 5:33 PM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > For more info, we have an FAQ here: https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.apache.org%2Flicenses%2Fcla-faq.html&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9d21049304dc4550116408d748f4a21c%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C1%7C637058087835364859&sdata=dyTMy%2FPsgDSQPlXnbHUTg4mHT2yUV8iZ7PzPWLNfS20%3D&reserved=0 <https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.apache.org%2Flicenses%2Fcla-faq.html&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9d21049304dc4550116408d748f4a21c%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C1%7C637058087835364859&sdata=dyTMy%2FPsgDSQPlXnbHUTg4mHT2yUV8iZ7PzPWLNfS20%3D&reserved=0>
> >
> > I forgot to mention that CLAs also apply to patent grants (not many
> > OSS licenses besides ALv2 and GPLv3 even address patents in scope of
> > the license AFAIK), though this is more an issue for development done
> > with corporate resources (I doubt many individuals bother filing
> > software patents outside a business).
> >
> > On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 10:35, James Bognar <jamesbognar@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > >
> > > Thank you for the clarification.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:32 AM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > CLAs aren’t assigning copyright or anything. It’s asserting that you have the rights to the code being uploaded and are allowing the ASF to use it under the Apache License. For non-trivial contributions made by non-committers, it’s typically up to the PMC to decide whether they can vouch for the contribution themselves or if the contributor should sign an ICLA.
> > > >
> > > > Basically, the provenance of all code at Apache should be traceable to committers with an ICLA on file or an initial software grant from the corporation who donated the code base.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 10:22, James Bognar <jamesbognar@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> Does that mean that I as a committer am legally responsible for
> > > >> contributions accepted by non-committers? It's not my code, so how
> > > >> can I grant copyright to it to the Apache Foundation?
> > > >>
> > > >> Just curious.
> > > >>
> > > >> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:07 AM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Not necessarily. An ICLA is needed to become a committer, and any contributions accepted are committed by people who already signed the ICLA. It can make things easier in the long run to submit an ICLA, though.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 08:08, James Bognar <jamesbognar@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Question...
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Do Outreachy candidates need to submit CLAs in order to make code contributions?
> > > >> >
> > > >> > --
> > > >> > Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
>
> Craig L Russell
> clr@apache.org
>
>
>
--
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>.
IMO, signing the ICLA should not be a prerequisite for acceptance of a first PR. The first PR is unlikely to be a significant contribution. Hopefully at the end of the internship there is a significant contribution and by that time, the candidate has become comfortable enough to sign the ICLA. So yes, good idea to introduce the ICLA at the first PR, but I don't think it has to be a barrier, at least not right away.
My 2 cents,
-Alex
On 10/4/19, 10:59 AM, "Craig Russell" <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Awasum,
I believe that you have exactly the right thinking on this subject. Details below.
> On Oct 4, 2019, at 10:43 AM, Awasum Yannick <aw...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> For simplicity, all contributors in the context of Outreachy or GSoC should just sign ICLAs when the submit first PRs. its going to make things very easy for us and them in the long run.
>
Yes, having an ICLA on file for all candidates is a good thing.
> So as soon as someone sends in their first PR, send them to fill an iCLA form and submit.
This will make it easier to give the person the ability to commit later on if they deserve it.
>
> I wonder if this will add another barrier of entry? as people might get confused about why they need to do that or even be reluctant to fill the form an send.
>
Here's where diversity gets involved. We should review the FAQ on the license page and see if filling the ICLA might be a barrier to the people we want to attract.
We should proactively look at the FAQ with this in mind and suggest changes if they are warranted.
But if the ICLA is a barrier, it should go into the friction log with suggested changes.
Regards,
Craig
> Thanks.
> Awasum
>
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 5:33 PM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> For more info, we have an FAQ here: https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.apache.org%2Flicenses%2Fcla-faq.html&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9d21049304dc4550116408d748f4a21c%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C1%7C637058087835364859&sdata=dyTMy%2FPsgDSQPlXnbHUTg4mHT2yUV8iZ7PzPWLNfS20%3D&reserved=0 <https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.apache.org%2Flicenses%2Fcla-faq.html&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9d21049304dc4550116408d748f4a21c%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C1%7C637058087835364859&sdata=dyTMy%2FPsgDSQPlXnbHUTg4mHT2yUV8iZ7PzPWLNfS20%3D&reserved=0>
>
> I forgot to mention that CLAs also apply to patent grants (not many
> OSS licenses besides ALv2 and GPLv3 even address patents in scope of
> the license AFAIK), though this is more an issue for development done
> with corporate resources (I doubt many individuals bother filing
> software patents outside a business).
>
> On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 10:35, James Bognar <jamesbognar@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you for the clarification.
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:32 AM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > >
> > > CLAs aren’t assigning copyright or anything. It’s asserting that you have the rights to the code being uploaded and are allowing the ASF to use it under the Apache License. For non-trivial contributions made by non-committers, it’s typically up to the PMC to decide whether they can vouch for the contribution themselves or if the contributor should sign an ICLA.
> > >
> > > Basically, the provenance of all code at Apache should be traceable to committers with an ICLA on file or an initial software grant from the corporation who donated the code base.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 10:22, James Bognar <jamesbognar@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Does that mean that I as a committer am legally responsible for
> > >> contributions accepted by non-committers? It's not my code, so how
> > >> can I grant copyright to it to the Apache Foundation?
> > >>
> > >> Just curious.
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:07 AM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > Not necessarily. An ICLA is needed to become a committer, and any contributions accepted are committed by people who already signed the ICLA. It can make things easier in the long run to submit an ICLA, though.
> > >> >
> > >> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 08:08, James Bognar <jamesbognar@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Question...
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Do Outreachy candidates need to submit CLAs in order to make code contributions?
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
> > >
> > > --
> > > Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
>
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
Craig L Russell
clr@apache.org
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by Alex Harui <ah...@adobe.com.INVALID>.
IMO, signing the ICLA should not be a prerequisite for acceptance of a first PR. The first PR is unlikely to be a significant contribution. Hopefully at the end of the internship there is a significant contribution and by that time, the candidate has become comfortable enough to sign the ICLA. So yes, good idea to introduce the ICLA at the first PR, but I don't think it has to be a barrier, at least not right away.
My 2 cents,
-Alex
On 10/4/19, 10:59 AM, "Craig Russell" <ap...@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Awasum,
I believe that you have exactly the right thinking on this subject. Details below.
> On Oct 4, 2019, at 10:43 AM, Awasum Yannick <aw...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> For simplicity, all contributors in the context of Outreachy or GSoC should just sign ICLAs when the submit first PRs. its going to make things very easy for us and them in the long run.
>
Yes, having an ICLA on file for all candidates is a good thing.
> So as soon as someone sends in their first PR, send them to fill an iCLA form and submit.
This will make it easier to give the person the ability to commit later on if they deserve it.
>
> I wonder if this will add another barrier of entry? as people might get confused about why they need to do that or even be reluctant to fill the form an send.
>
Here's where diversity gets involved. We should review the FAQ on the license page and see if filling the ICLA might be a barrier to the people we want to attract.
We should proactively look at the FAQ with this in mind and suggest changes if they are warranted.
But if the ICLA is a barrier, it should go into the friction log with suggested changes.
Regards,
Craig
> Thanks.
> Awasum
>
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 5:33 PM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> For more info, we have an FAQ here: https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.apache.org%2Flicenses%2Fcla-faq.html&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9d21049304dc4550116408d748f4a21c%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C1%7C637058087835364859&sdata=dyTMy%2FPsgDSQPlXnbHUTg4mHT2yUV8iZ7PzPWLNfS20%3D&reserved=0 <https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.apache.org%2Flicenses%2Fcla-faq.html&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7C9d21049304dc4550116408d748f4a21c%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C1%7C637058087835364859&sdata=dyTMy%2FPsgDSQPlXnbHUTg4mHT2yUV8iZ7PzPWLNfS20%3D&reserved=0>
>
> I forgot to mention that CLAs also apply to patent grants (not many
> OSS licenses besides ALv2 and GPLv3 even address patents in scope of
> the license AFAIK), though this is more an issue for development done
> with corporate resources (I doubt many individuals bother filing
> software patents outside a business).
>
> On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 10:35, James Bognar <jamesbognar@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you for the clarification.
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:32 AM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > >
> > > CLAs aren’t assigning copyright or anything. It’s asserting that you have the rights to the code being uploaded and are allowing the ASF to use it under the Apache License. For non-trivial contributions made by non-committers, it’s typically up to the PMC to decide whether they can vouch for the contribution themselves or if the contributor should sign an ICLA.
> > >
> > > Basically, the provenance of all code at Apache should be traceable to committers with an ICLA on file or an initial software grant from the corporation who donated the code base.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 10:22, James Bognar <jamesbognar@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Does that mean that I as a committer am legally responsible for
> > >> contributions accepted by non-committers? It's not my code, so how
> > >> can I grant copyright to it to the Apache Foundation?
> > >>
> > >> Just curious.
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:07 AM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > Not necessarily. An ICLA is needed to become a committer, and any contributions accepted are committed by people who already signed the ICLA. It can make things easier in the long run to submit an ICLA, though.
> > >> >
> > >> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 08:08, James Bognar <jamesbognar@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Question...
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Do Outreachy candidates need to submit CLAs in order to make code contributions?
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
> > >
> > > --
> > > Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
>
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
Craig L Russell
clr@apache.org
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by Craig Russell <ap...@gmail.com>.
Hi Awasum,
I believe that you have exactly the right thinking on this subject. Details below.
> On Oct 4, 2019, at 10:43 AM, Awasum Yannick <aw...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> For simplicity, all contributors in the context of Outreachy or GSoC should just sign ICLAs when the submit first PRs. its going to make things very easy for us and them in the long run.
>
Yes, having an ICLA on file for all candidates is a good thing.
> So as soon as someone sends in their first PR, send them to fill an iCLA form and submit.
This will make it easier to give the person the ability to commit later on if they deserve it.
>
> I wonder if this will add another barrier of entry? as people might get confused about why they need to do that or even be reluctant to fill the form an send.
>
Here's where diversity gets involved. We should review the FAQ on the license page and see if filling the ICLA might be a barrier to the people we want to attract.
We should proactively look at the FAQ with this in mind and suggest changes if they are warranted.
But if the ICLA is a barrier, it should go into the friction log with suggested changes.
Regards,
Craig
> Thanks.
> Awasum
>
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 5:33 PM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> For more info, we have an FAQ here: https://www.apache.org/licenses/cla-faq.html <https://www.apache.org/licenses/cla-faq.html>
>
> I forgot to mention that CLAs also apply to patent grants (not many
> OSS licenses besides ALv2 and GPLv3 even address patents in scope of
> the license AFAIK), though this is more an issue for development done
> with corporate resources (I doubt many individuals bother filing
> software patents outside a business).
>
> On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 10:35, James Bognar <jamesbognar@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you for the clarification.
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:32 AM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > >
> > > CLAs aren’t assigning copyright or anything. It’s asserting that you have the rights to the code being uploaded and are allowing the ASF to use it under the Apache License. For non-trivial contributions made by non-committers, it’s typically up to the PMC to decide whether they can vouch for the contribution themselves or if the contributor should sign an ICLA.
> > >
> > > Basically, the provenance of all code at Apache should be traceable to committers with an ICLA on file or an initial software grant from the corporation who donated the code base.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 10:22, James Bognar <jamesbognar@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Does that mean that I as a committer am legally responsible for
> > >> contributions accepted by non-committers? It's not my code, so how
> > >> can I grant copyright to it to the Apache Foundation?
> > >>
> > >> Just curious.
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:07 AM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > Not necessarily. An ICLA is needed to become a committer, and any contributions accepted are committed by people who already signed the ICLA. It can make things easier in the long run to submit an ICLA, though.
> > >> >
> > >> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 08:08, James Bognar <jamesbognar@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Question...
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Do Outreachy candidates need to submit CLAs in order to make code contributions?
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
> > >
> > > --
> > > Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
>
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
Craig L Russell
clr@apache.org
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by Craig Russell <ap...@gmail.com>.
Hi Awasum,
I believe that you have exactly the right thinking on this subject. Details below.
> On Oct 4, 2019, at 10:43 AM, Awasum Yannick <aw...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> For simplicity, all contributors in the context of Outreachy or GSoC should just sign ICLAs when the submit first PRs. its going to make things very easy for us and them in the long run.
>
Yes, having an ICLA on file for all candidates is a good thing.
> So as soon as someone sends in their first PR, send them to fill an iCLA form and submit.
This will make it easier to give the person the ability to commit later on if they deserve it.
>
> I wonder if this will add another barrier of entry? as people might get confused about why they need to do that or even be reluctant to fill the form an send.
>
Here's where diversity gets involved. We should review the FAQ on the license page and see if filling the ICLA might be a barrier to the people we want to attract.
We should proactively look at the FAQ with this in mind and suggest changes if they are warranted.
But if the ICLA is a barrier, it should go into the friction log with suggested changes.
Regards,
Craig
> Thanks.
> Awasum
>
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 5:33 PM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> For more info, we have an FAQ here: https://www.apache.org/licenses/cla-faq.html <https://www.apache.org/licenses/cla-faq.html>
>
> I forgot to mention that CLAs also apply to patent grants (not many
> OSS licenses besides ALv2 and GPLv3 even address patents in scope of
> the license AFAIK), though this is more an issue for development done
> with corporate resources (I doubt many individuals bother filing
> software patents outside a business).
>
> On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 10:35, James Bognar <jamesbognar@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you for the clarification.
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:32 AM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > >
> > > CLAs aren’t assigning copyright or anything. It’s asserting that you have the rights to the code being uploaded and are allowing the ASF to use it under the Apache License. For non-trivial contributions made by non-committers, it’s typically up to the PMC to decide whether they can vouch for the contribution themselves or if the contributor should sign an ICLA.
> > >
> > > Basically, the provenance of all code at Apache should be traceable to committers with an ICLA on file or an initial software grant from the corporation who donated the code base.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 10:22, James Bognar <jamesbognar@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Does that mean that I as a committer am legally responsible for
> > >> contributions accepted by non-committers? It's not my code, so how
> > >> can I grant copyright to it to the Apache Foundation?
> > >>
> > >> Just curious.
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:07 AM Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > Not necessarily. An ICLA is needed to become a committer, and any contributions accepted are committed by people who already signed the ICLA. It can make things easier in the long run to submit an ICLA, though.
> > >> >
> > >> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 08:08, James Bognar <jamesbognar@apache.org <ma...@apache.org>> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Question...
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Do Outreachy candidates need to submit CLAs in order to make code contributions?
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
> > >
> > > --
> > > Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
>
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <boards@gmail.com <ma...@gmail.com>>
Craig L Russell
clr@apache.org
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by Awasum Yannick <aw...@apache.org>.
For simplicity, all contributors in the context of Outreachy or GSoC should
just sign ICLAs when the submit first PRs. its going to make things very
easy for us and them in the long run.
So as soon as someone sends in their first PR, send them to fill an iCLA
form and submit.
I wonder if this will add another barrier of entry? as people might get
confused about why they need to do that or even be reluctant to fill the
form an send.
Thanks.
Awasum
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 5:33 PM Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> For more info, we have an FAQ here:
> https://www.apache.org/licenses/cla-faq.html
>
> I forgot to mention that CLAs also apply to patent grants (not many
> OSS licenses besides ALv2 and GPLv3 even address patents in scope of
> the license AFAIK), though this is more an issue for development done
> with corporate resources (I doubt many individuals bother filing
> software patents outside a business).
>
> On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 10:35, James Bognar <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you for the clarification.
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:32 AM Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > CLAs aren’t assigning copyright or anything. It’s asserting that you
> have the rights to the code being uploaded and are allowing the ASF to use
> it under the Apache License. For non-trivial contributions made by
> non-committers, it’s typically up to the PMC to decide whether they can
> vouch for the contribution themselves or if the contributor should sign an
> ICLA.
> > >
> > > Basically, the provenance of all code at Apache should be traceable to
> committers with an ICLA on file or an initial software grant from the
> corporation who donated the code base.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 10:22, James Bognar <ja...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Does that mean that I as a committer am legally responsible for
> > >> contributions accepted by non-committers? It's not my code, so how
> > >> can I grant copyright to it to the Apache Foundation?
> > >>
> > >> Just curious.
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:07 AM Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > Not necessarily. An ICLA is needed to become a committer, and any
> contributions accepted are committed by people who already signed the ICLA.
> It can make things easier in the long run to submit an ICLA, though.
> > >> >
> > >> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 08:08, James Bognar <ja...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Question...
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Do Outreachy candidates need to submit CLAs in order to make code
> contributions?
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
> > >
> > > --
> > > Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
>
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
>
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by Awasum Yannick <aw...@apache.org>.
For simplicity, all contributors in the context of Outreachy or GSoC should
just sign ICLAs when the submit first PRs. its going to make things very
easy for us and them in the long run.
So as soon as someone sends in their first PR, send them to fill an iCLA
form and submit.
I wonder if this will add another barrier of entry? as people might get
confused about why they need to do that or even be reluctant to fill the
form an send.
Thanks.
Awasum
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 5:33 PM Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> For more info, we have an FAQ here:
> https://www.apache.org/licenses/cla-faq.html
>
> I forgot to mention that CLAs also apply to patent grants (not many
> OSS licenses besides ALv2 and GPLv3 even address patents in scope of
> the license AFAIK), though this is more an issue for development done
> with corporate resources (I doubt many individuals bother filing
> software patents outside a business).
>
> On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 10:35, James Bognar <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Thank you for the clarification.
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:32 AM Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > CLAs aren’t assigning copyright or anything. It’s asserting that you
> have the rights to the code being uploaded and are allowing the ASF to use
> it under the Apache License. For non-trivial contributions made by
> non-committers, it’s typically up to the PMC to decide whether they can
> vouch for the contribution themselves or if the contributor should sign an
> ICLA.
> > >
> > > Basically, the provenance of all code at Apache should be traceable to
> committers with an ICLA on file or an initial software grant from the
> corporation who donated the code base.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 10:22, James Bognar <ja...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >>
> > >> Does that mean that I as a committer am legally responsible for
> > >> contributions accepted by non-committers? It's not my code, so how
> > >> can I grant copyright to it to the Apache Foundation?
> > >>
> > >> Just curious.
> > >>
> > >> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:07 AM Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > Not necessarily. An ICLA is needed to become a committer, and any
> contributions accepted are committed by people who already signed the ICLA.
> It can make things easier in the long run to submit an ICLA, though.
> > >> >
> > >> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 08:08, James Bognar <ja...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Question...
> > >> >>
> > >> >> Do Outreachy candidates need to submit CLAs in order to make code
> contributions?
> > >> >
> > >> > --
> > >> > Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
> > >
> > > --
> > > Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
>
>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
>
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>.
For more info, we have an FAQ here: https://www.apache.org/licenses/cla-faq.html
I forgot to mention that CLAs also apply to patent grants (not many
OSS licenses besides ALv2 and GPLv3 even address patents in scope of
the license AFAIK), though this is more an issue for development done
with corporate resources (I doubt many individuals bother filing
software patents outside a business).
On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 10:35, James Bognar <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Thank you for the clarification.
>
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:32 AM Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > CLAs aren’t assigning copyright or anything. It’s asserting that you have the rights to the code being uploaded and are allowing the ASF to use it under the Apache License. For non-trivial contributions made by non-committers, it’s typically up to the PMC to decide whether they can vouch for the contribution themselves or if the contributor should sign an ICLA.
> >
> > Basically, the provenance of all code at Apache should be traceable to committers with an ICLA on file or an initial software grant from the corporation who donated the code base.
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 10:22, James Bognar <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Does that mean that I as a committer am legally responsible for
> >> contributions accepted by non-committers? It's not my code, so how
> >> can I grant copyright to it to the Apache Foundation?
> >>
> >> Just curious.
> >>
> >> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:07 AM Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Not necessarily. An ICLA is needed to become a committer, and any contributions accepted are committed by people who already signed the ICLA. It can make things easier in the long run to submit an ICLA, though.
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 08:08, James Bognar <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Question...
> >> >>
> >> >> Do Outreachy candidates need to submit CLAs in order to make code contributions?
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
> >
> > --
> > Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
--
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>.
For more info, we have an FAQ here: https://www.apache.org/licenses/cla-faq.html
I forgot to mention that CLAs also apply to patent grants (not many
OSS licenses besides ALv2 and GPLv3 even address patents in scope of
the license AFAIK), though this is more an issue for development done
with corporate resources (I doubt many individuals bother filing
software patents outside a business).
On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 10:35, James Bognar <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> Thank you for the clarification.
>
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:32 AM Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > CLAs aren’t assigning copyright or anything. It’s asserting that you have the rights to the code being uploaded and are allowing the ASF to use it under the Apache License. For non-trivial contributions made by non-committers, it’s typically up to the PMC to decide whether they can vouch for the contribution themselves or if the contributor should sign an ICLA.
> >
> > Basically, the provenance of all code at Apache should be traceable to committers with an ICLA on file or an initial software grant from the corporation who donated the code base.
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 10:22, James Bognar <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >> Does that mean that I as a committer am legally responsible for
> >> contributions accepted by non-committers? It's not my code, so how
> >> can I grant copyright to it to the Apache Foundation?
> >>
> >> Just curious.
> >>
> >> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:07 AM Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Not necessarily. An ICLA is needed to become a committer, and any contributions accepted are committed by people who already signed the ICLA. It can make things easier in the long run to submit an ICLA, though.
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 08:08, James Bognar <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Question...
> >> >>
> >> >> Do Outreachy candidates need to submit CLAs in order to make code contributions?
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
> >
> > --
> > Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
--
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by James Bognar <ja...@apache.org>.
Thank you for the clarification.
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:32 AM Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> CLAs aren’t assigning copyright or anything. It’s asserting that you have the rights to the code being uploaded and are allowing the ASF to use it under the Apache License. For non-trivial contributions made by non-committers, it’s typically up to the PMC to decide whether they can vouch for the contribution themselves or if the contributor should sign an ICLA.
>
> Basically, the provenance of all code at Apache should be traceable to committers with an ICLA on file or an initial software grant from the corporation who donated the code base.
>
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 10:22, James Bognar <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> Does that mean that I as a committer am legally responsible for
>> contributions accepted by non-committers? It's not my code, so how
>> can I grant copyright to it to the Apache Foundation?
>>
>> Just curious.
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:07 AM Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Not necessarily. An ICLA is needed to become a committer, and any contributions accepted are committed by people who already signed the ICLA. It can make things easier in the long run to submit an ICLA, though.
>> >
>> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 08:08, James Bognar <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Question...
>> >>
>> >> Do Outreachy candidates need to submit CLAs in order to make code contributions?
>> >
>> > --
>> > Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by James Bognar <ja...@apache.org>.
Thank you for the clarification.
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:32 AM Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> CLAs aren’t assigning copyright or anything. It’s asserting that you have the rights to the code being uploaded and are allowing the ASF to use it under the Apache License. For non-trivial contributions made by non-committers, it’s typically up to the PMC to decide whether they can vouch for the contribution themselves or if the contributor should sign an ICLA.
>
> Basically, the provenance of all code at Apache should be traceable to committers with an ICLA on file or an initial software grant from the corporation who donated the code base.
>
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 10:22, James Bognar <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> Does that mean that I as a committer am legally responsible for
>> contributions accepted by non-committers? It's not my code, so how
>> can I grant copyright to it to the Apache Foundation?
>>
>> Just curious.
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:07 AM Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Not necessarily. An ICLA is needed to become a committer, and any contributions accepted are committed by people who already signed the ICLA. It can make things easier in the long run to submit an ICLA, though.
>> >
>> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 08:08, James Bognar <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> Question...
>> >>
>> >> Do Outreachy candidates need to submit CLAs in order to make code contributions?
>> >
>> > --
>> > Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>.
CLAs aren’t assigning copyright or anything. It’s asserting that you have
the rights to the code being uploaded and are allowing the ASF to use it
under the Apache License. For non-trivial contributions made by
non-committers, it’s typically up to the PMC to decide whether they can
vouch for the contribution themselves or if the contributor should sign an
ICLA.
Basically, the provenance of all code at Apache should be traceable to
committers with an ICLA on file or an initial software grant from the
corporation who donated the code base.
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 10:22, James Bognar <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> Does that mean that I as a committer am legally responsible for
> contributions accepted by non-committers? It's not my code, so how
> can I grant copyright to it to the Apache Foundation?
>
> Just curious.
>
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:07 AM Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Not necessarily. An ICLA is needed to become a committer, and any
> contributions accepted are committed by people who already signed the ICLA.
> It can make things easier in the long run to submit an ICLA, though.
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 08:08, James Bognar <ja...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Question...
> >>
> >> Do Outreachy candidates need to submit CLAs in order to make code
> contributions?
> >
> > --
> > Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
>
--
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>.
CLAs aren’t assigning copyright or anything. It’s asserting that you have
the rights to the code being uploaded and are allowing the ASF to use it
under the Apache License. For non-trivial contributions made by
non-committers, it’s typically up to the PMC to decide whether they can
vouch for the contribution themselves or if the contributor should sign an
ICLA.
Basically, the provenance of all code at Apache should be traceable to
committers with an ICLA on file or an initial software grant from the
corporation who donated the code base.
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 10:22, James Bognar <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> Does that mean that I as a committer am legally responsible for
> contributions accepted by non-committers? It's not my code, so how
> can I grant copyright to it to the Apache Foundation?
>
> Just curious.
>
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:07 AM Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Not necessarily. An ICLA is needed to become a committer, and any
> contributions accepted are committed by people who already signed the ICLA.
> It can make things easier in the long run to submit an ICLA, though.
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 08:08, James Bognar <ja...@apache.org>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Question...
> >>
> >> Do Outreachy candidates need to submit CLAs in order to make code
> contributions?
> >
> > --
> > Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
>
--
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by James Bognar <ja...@apache.org>.
Does that mean that I as a committer am legally responsible for
contributions accepted by non-committers? It's not my code, so how
can I grant copyright to it to the Apache Foundation?
Just curious.
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:07 AM Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Not necessarily. An ICLA is needed to become a committer, and any contributions accepted are committed by people who already signed the ICLA. It can make things easier in the long run to submit an ICLA, though.
>
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 08:08, James Bognar <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> Question...
>>
>> Do Outreachy candidates need to submit CLAs in order to make code contributions?
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by James Bognar <ja...@apache.org>.
Does that mean that I as a committer am legally responsible for
contributions accepted by non-committers? It's not my code, so how
can I grant copyright to it to the Apache Foundation?
Just curious.
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:07 AM Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Not necessarily. An ICLA is needed to become a committer, and any contributions accepted are committed by people who already signed the ICLA. It can make things easier in the long run to submit an ICLA, though.
>
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 08:08, James Bognar <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> Question...
>>
>> Do Outreachy candidates need to submit CLAs in order to make code contributions?
>
> --
> Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>.
Not necessarily. An ICLA is needed to become a committer, and any
contributions accepted are committed by people who already signed the ICLA.
It can make things easier in the long run to submit an ICLA, though.
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 08:08, James Bognar <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> Question...
>
> Do Outreachy candidates need to submit CLAs in order to make code
> contributions?
>
--
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>.
Not necessarily. An ICLA is needed to become a committer, and any
contributions accepted are committed by people who already signed the ICLA.
It can make things easier in the long run to submit an ICLA, though.
On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 08:08, James Bognar <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> Question...
>
> Do Outreachy candidates need to submit CLAs in order to make code
> contributions?
>
--
Matt Sicker <bo...@gmail.com>
Re: Outreachy candidates and CLAs
Posted by Ayeshmantha Perera <ak...@gmail.com>.
Hi James
Nope James.No CLAs for them.They just have to contribute.
Regards
Ayesh
On Fri 4. Oct 2019 at 15:08, James Bognar <ja...@apache.org> wrote:
> Question...
>
> Do Outreachy candidates need to submit CLAs in order to make code
> contributions?
>