trinity-devel@lists.pearsoncomputing.net

Message: previous - next
Month: October 2014

Re: [trinity-devel] Contributor License Agreements

From: "Dr. Nikolaus Klepp" <office@...>
Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 10:51:18 +0200
Am Donnerstag, 16. Oktober 2014 schrieb Timothy Pearson:
> > I have a question:
> >
> > I often process patches from François, making adjustments as needed, and
> > then
> > commit. For such posts will be listed as an author François and as
> > Signed-off
> > will be mine. Is this the correct procedure?
> 
> Actually he needs to sign off on them.  It gets a bit confusing because
> there are actually three authorship fields in GIT that we are interested
> in: author, signed-off-by, and committer.  In this case his name goes into
> author and signed-off-by, and your name goes into committer.  So when you
> process the patches, if he provided a signed-off-by line for that patch in
> Bugzilla then you copy that into the commit message on the last line of
> the commit message, separated by a blank line.
> 
> As I am still phasing the CLA system in, and I trust the core team not to
> sue, include copyrighted code, etc., if he has not provided a
> signed-off-by line for the patches go ahead and commit them without a
> signed-off-by line.
> 
> For developers with GIT accounts you can commit and sign off all in one
> step by passing the -s flag to git commit.  Just be aware that you are
> stating you have the legal right to license the commit when you do this;
> philosophically this is the same as before but the procedure is a bit more
> formal now.
> 
> > Or contributions should be Signed-off at the same time by François? If so,
> > how
> > should it be implemented technically?
> 
> When he submits patches he should provide a signed-off-by line for that
> patch in the bugtracker.  If anyone outside of the core team submits a
> patch without a signed-off-by line for that patch in the bug report we
> need to request that they provide one--the patch itself does not have to
> be resubmitted, but the submitter needs to add a comment stating they are
> signing off on that patch and appending the appropriate signed-off-by line
> to that comment.
> 
> > Similarly, in cases of occasional contributors who do not have commit
> > access?
> > For example, during the integration of the translations.
> 
> Same as above; if patch is submitted via Email then the Email should
> contain the signed-off-by line.  It's always OK to reply to a patch
> submission and request that a signed-off-by line be provided.
> 
> Does this make sense?  Basically we're just fixing the bookkeeping end of
> the project so that we know who authored, who owns, who released, and who
> committed anything and can thereby better avoid any potential legal
> issues.
> 
> Tim

"How do you call it when a bus full of lawers goes over the cliffs?" "A good beginning!"

What about just demanding form every contributor for his/her patches/bugreports to be accepted the patches/report must comply to GPL v2/v3/BSD ... ? Place it in the bugtracker, place it on the list, be done.

If somebody wants to sue you, he/she will do despite whaterver contract was signed - especally in the "free" US. In the rest of the world that signed CLA will most likely not be valid at all (in most cases it's sufficent to claim you have not comprehended the text in its full extent, 'cause it's not written in your tongue)

Nik


-- 
Please do not email me anything that you are not comfortable also sharing with the NSA.