incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Juergen Schmidt <jogischm...@googlemail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Pootle and New Contributor Category
Date Fri, 08 Jun 2012 08:06:15 GMT
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" <dave2wave@comcast.net> wrote:
> 
>>
>> On Jun 7, 2012, at 3:43 PM, Kay Schenk wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 10:24 AM, Dennis E. Hamilton <orcmid@apache.org
>>> 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:robweir@apache.org]
>>>> Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2012 09:41
>>>> To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org
>>>> Subject: Re: *DRAFT FINAL* June board report
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 6:59 AM, Jürgen Schmidt
>>>> <jogischmidt@googlemail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 6/7/12 12:10 PM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>>>>> On 7 June 2012 11:02, Jürgen Schmidt <jogischmidt@googlemail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 6/7/12 11:54 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 7 June 2012 10:47, Jürgen Schmidt <jogischmidt@googlemail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 6/7/12 11:28 AM, Ross Gardler wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 7 June 2012 05:50, Herbert Duerr <hdu@apache.org>
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"
>>
>>
> 


Mime
View raw message