Contributor License Agreement (CLA)?, Re: Wiki page updated

[Patrick Barnes]

David Eisenstein wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Jan 2006, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
>
> > Hi
> > 
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legacy/
> > 
> > I have improved the content as well as look and feel of the wiki page to 
> > match other project pages within our Fedora Project wiki. 
>
> Yes, the page looks a lot nicer.  It looks like a lot of hard work went 
> into it, and it shows.
>
> > I have also 
> > included the information that Fedora Legacy is now a official Fedora 
> > Project supported by the Fedora Foundation. 
>
> Good.  I have a question.  No one has said anything about the process of
> signing up with the Fedora Project.  I just discovered that process last
> night on IRC, at the suggestion of <nman64> (Patrick Barnes) that in order
> to officially be a contributor to the Fedora Project, and to gain
> necessary privileges to help me carry out the work for the Fedora project
> (in my case, Bugzilla privileges), I needed to apply at
> 	<https://admin.fedora.redhat.com/accounts/>
> get a Fedora Contributor account and (electronically) sign a Contributor
> License Agreement (CLA), among other things.
>
> Is this something that everyone who contributes to Fedora Legacy will be 
> required to do, especially now that Fedora Legacy is officially part of 
> the Fedora Foundation?  If so, does that need to be documented in the 
> Fedora Legacy Wiki?
>
> I, for one, feel a bit relieved at being given the opportunity to sign a 
> Contributor License Agreement -- because I have been a little bit 
> concerned for awhile just who might be considered liable if someone used a 
> Legacy package, felt the package damaged their machine or their business 
> and decided to sue.  The CLA (a copy of which is attached) makes it clear 
> that I as a contributor am releasing the work that I do with NO WARRANTEE
> WHATSOEVER, and that this is my understanding -- that I am not offering
> any kind of guarantee that my work will work in all circumstances or won't 
> cause hair to grow on some server's CPU.
>
> (For those who are wondering, docs about signing on to the Fedora Account
> System are at:
> 	<http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/AccountSystem>.)
>   
This is a decision that each sub-project must make.  There are certain
tasks for which the Account System is required.  It is up to each team
to decide whether or not to require an account for other situations. 
The CLA has obvious advantages and should be required for anyone who
contributes things like code or packages.  The Legacy team might want to
get a group in the Account System in order to track contributors, make
the CLA requirement easier to handle, and to provide a single group that
can be granted access.  The Account System might become more of a
requirement in the future, so it would also prepare you for such a
time.  If this is something that the Legacy team would be interested in,
let me know.
> > I have clarified some 
> > terminology in the pages. As an example of these, Fedora Project in 
> > general has avoiding using the term "support" in any our webpages or 
> > documentation to avoid the confusion with commercial support services 
> > and SLA's. 
>
> I am assuming then that the Fedora Foundation then officially leaves
> commercial support services and SLA's (Service Level Agreements?) to 
> Red Hat, right?
>
>   
We have no official position in this matter.

We generally point people to Red Hat if they require such things, but
there is no policy with regards to this.  Remember that Red Hat only
provides support for RHEL, not for Fedora, so making the distinction is
important when you refer to Red Hat's support.  Anyone can offer support
services for Fedora, but Red Hat and the Foundation do not.
> Are there other examples of good terminology that keep Fedora Legacy's 
> goals and verbiage in line with the Foundation's?  On the wiki or 
> something?
>   
Some guidelines can be found at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/WikiEditing

Some of those apply only to the wiki, but others apply to the entire
Fedora Project.  You'll also find some valuable links there.
> > I have replaced them with maintenance or updates as 
> > appopriate. Also I have replaced the misleading term "End Of Release 
> > (EOL)" with maintenace mode as indicated by Jesse Keating in his earlier 
> > mail to the list. 
>
> I agree.  We shouldn't use the term "EOL" until a given product is
> actually no longer supported by anybody.
>
> > I have copied over and clarified the FAQ from 
> > http://fedoralegacy.org/faq into 
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legacy/FAQ. 
>
> Great work, Rahul.  Looks good!
>
> > Information on the security 
> > procedures from the legacy site has also been copied over into the wiki 
> > in anticipation of the depreciation of http://fedoralegacy.org in favor 
> > of adding information to the primary Fedora Project website at 
> > http://fedoraproject.org. Comments and feedback is most welcome.
>
> Rahul, you removed text mentioning what distributions of RHL and Fedora
> Core that Legacy supports off of the main page at
> <http://fedoralegacy.org/wiki/Legacy>.  It seems to me it would be good to
> let that remain there, even if that is a question answered in our FAQ.
>   
I've helped Rahul get that piece of the FAQ included on the front page,
so you only have to worry about editing the FAQ to update that
information, now.
> If I think of other comments, will write more.  Thanks again, Rahul.  And 
> thanks for posting to us that you did so, and for joining our list!
>
> 	Warm regards,
>
> 	David Eisenstein
>   
Feel free to let me know if you have questions.

-- 
Patrick "The N-Man" Barnes
nman64 at n-man.com

http://www.n-man.com/
-- 
Have I been helpful?  Rate my assistance!  http://rate.affero.net/nman64/


-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-legacy-list/attachments/20060121/f5c8a253/attachment.sig>