CLA requirements

[Rahul Sundaram]

Karsten Wade wrote:
> On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 02:14 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
> 
>> You miss the point completely. In short we dont expect ambassadors to be 
>> highly technical people. Making all of them sign the CLA is currently a 
>> high barrier to entry.  
> 
> There is no big technical difficulty in signing the CLA.  It is not that
> high of a barrier.
> 
> When people balk at accomplishing a minor technical task to gain entry,
> it makes me wonder.  I personally consider that being able to obtain and
> use a GPG key *should* be a requirement for anyone representing Fedora.
> If they are stopped from participating by that ... well, disappointing,
> but, oh, well.  Anyway, that's just MHO and does not represent the
> direction I am backing for Fedora.

Depends on the context. If it's for maintaining a package, it is just 
part of the process. The maintainer has to deal with much more 
complicated things than a gpg signature during the course anyway. For a 
ambassadors, it is relatively high. For someone new, editing a wiki for 
adding some simple comments or fixing a typo, its way too high to bother.

Rahul