CLA requirements

[Patrick W. Barnes]

On Wednesday 21 February 2007, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>
> As far as fedorabugs, I think it might be good for them to have the CLA
> done, since they may be submitting patches, or suggested docs or other
> content that might end up shipping in packages and/or web pages.
>
> Alternately, perhaps bugzilla could do what it was suggested that the
> wiki do, namely have something like the wiki's:
> "By hitting Save Changes you put your changes under the WikiLicense. If
> you don't want that, hit Cancel to cancel your changes."
>
> ie,
>
> "By hitting submit you put your changes under the bugzillalicense. If
> you don't want that, don't hit submit".
>

I agree, except that we need to point to the CLA as the agreement, rather than 
a specific license.  That applies to the wiki, too.

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

http://n-man.com/

LinkedIn:
http://linkedin.com/in/nman64

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

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/attachments/20070223/f8dc71c8/attachment.bin