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 Thu, 07 Jun 2012 23:22:33 GMT
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?


> 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