There is a draft of a new CLA being circulated at FreeIPA:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/freeipa-devel/2008-April/msg00052.html http://www.freeipa.org/wiki/images/2/2b/GenericCLA.pdf
I've asked Legal for a summary of what's changed and why, and an answer to whether all Fedora contributors would need to re-execute this agreement. (I'm betting the answer to the last question is "yes," but that's just an educated guess.) I believe the changes to be minor, mainly to eliminate loopholes and to make this process less onerous in the future, but I'll wait for more information.
Ricky Zhou tells me that our CLA signing information is kept in the form of a log table, not a simple date field. AIUI then, we have the ability to find out what CLAs have been executed over the life of an account.
If I'm correct about that, I want to say first, thanks for a really good design. :-)
Second, since a new CLA is a possibility -- I just want to confirm that we are not *overwriting* old CLA data, i.e. we would maintain a history that user "johndoe" signed a CLA on 2007-10-15 and then again on 2008-04-28.
On Wed, 9 Apr 2008, Paul W. Frields wrote:
There is a draft of a new CLA being circulated at FreeIPA:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/freeipa-devel/2008-April/msg00052.html http://www.freeipa.org/wiki/images/2/2b/GenericCLA.pdf
I've asked Legal for a summary of what's changed and why, and an answer to whether all Fedora contributors would need to re-execute this agreement. (I'm betting the answer to the last question is "yes," but that's just an educated guess.) I believe the changes to be minor, mainly to eliminate loopholes and to make this process less onerous in the future, but I'll wait for more information.
Ricky Zhou tells me that our CLA signing information is kept in the form of a log table, not a simple date field. AIUI then, we have the ability to find out what CLAs have been executed over the life of an account.
If I'm correct about that, I want to say first, thanks for a really good design. :-)
This is only true for FAS2, not FAS1 I think.
Second, since a new CLA is a possibility -- I just want to confirm that we are not *overwriting* old CLA data, i.e. we would maintain a history that user "johndoe" signed a CLA on 2007-10-15 and then again on 2008-04-28.
AFAIK the cla gets signed and a copy of it gets forwarded on to some legal address. We might want to contact the owner of that address (maybe spot? maybe greg?) and see if that mailbox is still full of cla signatures.
-Mike
On Wed, 2008-04-09 at 09:51 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
On Wed, 9 Apr 2008, Paul W. Frields wrote:
There is a draft of a new CLA being circulated at FreeIPA:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/freeipa-devel/2008-April/msg00052.html http://www.freeipa.org/wiki/images/2/2b/GenericCLA.pdf
I've asked Legal for a summary of what's changed and why, and an answer to whether all Fedora contributors would need to re-execute this agreement. (I'm betting the answer to the last question is "yes," but that's just an educated guess.) I believe the changes to be minor, mainly to eliminate loopholes and to make this process less onerous in the future, but I'll wait for more information.
Ricky Zhou tells me that our CLA signing information is kept in the form of a log table, not a simple date field. AIUI then, we have the ability to find out what CLAs have been executed over the life of an account.
If I'm correct about that, I want to say first, thanks for a really good design. :-)
This is only true for FAS2, not FAS1 I think.
Second, since a new CLA is a possibility -- I just want to confirm that we are not *overwriting* old CLA data, i.e. we would maintain a history that user "johndoe" signed a CLA on 2007-10-15 and then again on 2008-04-28.
AFAIK the cla gets signed and a copy of it gets forwarded on to some legal address. We might want to contact the owner of that address (maybe spot? maybe greg?) and see if that mailbox is still full of cla signatures.
I think it's spot. He'll see this and confirm or deny as needed. :-)
On Wed, 2008-04-09 at 11:58 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
On Wed, 2008-04-09 at 15:43 +0000, Paul W. Frields wrote:
I think it's spot. He'll see this and confirm or deny as needed. :-)
CLAs come into my inbox. I hadn't been keeping them, just sanity checking them.
If I understand what Ricky meant by "log table" correctly, we have a list of dates that we can tie to account names. If someone could confirm this who understands the bits involved, that would be great.
On Wed, 9 Apr 2008, Paul W. Frields wrote:
On Wed, 2008-04-09 at 11:58 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
On Wed, 2008-04-09 at 15:43 +0000, Paul W. Frields wrote:
I think it's spot. He'll see this and confirm or deny as needed. :-)
CLAs come into my inbox. I hadn't been keeping them, just sanity checking them.
If I understand what Ricky meant by "log table" correctly, we have a list of dates that we can tie to account names. If someone could confirm this who understands the bits involved, that would be great.
I think we'd be covered. WE know when oldies like myself signed the CLA because it tracks when I joined cla_done. If I re-sign something I don't think I'll be joining cla_done and the new cla agreement should show up in the log table.
-Mike
-
Mike McGrath -
Paul W. Frields -
Tom Callaway