incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Pootle and New Contributor Category
Date Sun, 10 Jun 2012 23:50:29 GMT
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 8:43 AM, Juan C. Sanz <juancsanzc@hotmail.com> wrote:
> El 08/06/2012 1:22, Rob Weir escribió:
>
>> On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 7:08 PM, 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"
>>>
>> Why not allow that to everyone?  I'm trying to see what harm would
>> come from that?  No one needs special permission to enter a BZ issue
>> and attach a patch.  Why can't someone log into Pootle and enter a
>> suggestion?  Is there a technical reason why this is not happening?
>
> +1
> But as far as I can remember it didn't work properly
> http://markmail.org/message/kahew2uqvrzmf4ag?q=list:org%2Eapache%2Eincubator%2Eooo-dev+pootle+suggestion
>

So we fix the technical problem, right?   My main point is it seems
premature to take this to legal-discuss, the IPMC, etc., if all that
is needed is a quick chat with Infra.

-Rob

>

Mime
View raw message