Re: JIRA Attachments/Licensing

[Cliff Schmidt <cl...@gmail.com>]

Sorry for the slow reply on this one.  I think a "What's this?" link
sounds like a great idea.   I also think sending this to legal-discuss
seems like the right place to get feedback or volunteers to write it.
In any case, I'll give it a look as well.

Cliff

On 7/20/06, David Crossley <cr...@apache.org> wrote:
> Ross Gardler wrote:
> > Tim Williams wrote:
> > >Nigel's recent decision (or more his rationale)  to not assign ASF
> > >license with his attachment made me take a look at our JIRA.  I'd like
> > >to highlight what i think are issues with the screen.  Just in case
> > >folks agree, I looked and don't see an easy way to change it just for
> > >out project but anyway:
> > >
> > >1) The screen makes the choice appear as if it's questioning whether
> > >one wants the code "included" vs. "not included" in the software.
> > >And, while that's obviously the net effect, it's not the "real"
> > >question.
> > >
> > >2)  When folks click the "Grant license" button, I'm not convinced
> > >everyone really knows what it means and how important it is to us.
> > >More importantly, whether they have the right to "grant" it anyway.
> > >
> > >For #1, I'm not sure what the best way to word it is.  I htink the
> > >first option "Grant license" is probably worded properly but the
> > >second one is, IMO, confusing.
> > >
> > >For #2, I suggest we add a small well-crafted "What's this mean?"
> > >section immediately below it to briefly explain what they are doing
> > >when they click the "Grant" option.  Perhaps with some hints as to
> > >times where they may not be able to grant it (e.g. it was paid work,
> > >don't solely own it, not wholly original, etc.)
> > >
> > >Thoughts?
> >
> > I agree. Perhaps a suggestion to the infra@a.o team would be in order
> > (they control that part of Jira).
>
> Good points Tim. I reckon that you are onto something here.
> Perhaps this is an impediment to new contributors.
>
> I am not sure where would be the best place to discuss this.
> Perhaps the legal-discuss@ list. When the document is ready
> to link to, then infrastructure@ would add it.
>
> Anyway, i Cc Cliff. Perhaps he would know the best way forward.
>
> -David
>