On Feb 11, 2008 8:18 AM, Karsten 'quaid' Wade <kwade@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Bugzilla is not on there for several reasons, as I recall. The fact > that bugzilla.redhat.com is used by Red Hat for business makes it > difficult for Fedora to dictate the terms of usage. The Fedora CLA > can't really be a barrier to e.g. getting a bugzilla.r.c account. Not a barrier for obtaining an account, no. Even if we had our own bugzilla instance (whihc I'm not advocating), it would be downright silly to require a CLA to obtain a bz account. However, we can require whatever we want in order to give additional access to bz (which is entirely in Fedora's control) > Also, bz work falls somewhere between "Mailing list member" and "Wiki > contributor." The former is a discussion and information exchange, the > later is a contribution of content, such as a patch. To be an effective triager you need to be a wiki contributor - I really equate the two on about the same level, or maybe > > Typically, the bz report itself has served the purpose of making it > clear the patch was a contribution, etc. > > For bug triagers, it seems to make sense to, as you say, capture them > with a click-through CLA. That way we can be assured that content can > then be moved to e.g. source control. > > > There's also the argument that signing the CLA is a (minor) technical > > hurdle for new triagers to overcome. While this is valuable, I also > > think that other things could be used in it's place (open to > > suggestions here) to demonstrate technical ability. > > Yes, we hear a lot that it is too difficult. > > We've got a good doc on how-to: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject/UsingGpg > > I'm not arguing that it's ideal, but it is a fair barrier at a certain > point. Maybe not for triagers, though. > > > The argument that came to light, and was discussed on > > fedora-devel-list[2] that FAS requires "too much" personal information > > (i.e. home address, phone number, etc) in order to sign up for an > > account and sign the CLA. Access to bugzilla is controlled via FAS, > > therefore, without an FAS account, access to triage bugs is a > > non-starter. > > I'm going to trust Red Hat's lawyers when they say they need that > information in order to have the level of assurance to distribute a > contribution. If we need to get a hold of a contributor for any > legitimate reason, it'll be a bummer if they really don't live at 123 > Main Street, Anywhere, USA. > > > So the question here is whether cla_done is required in order to > > belong to the 'fedorabugs' group in FAS? My vote is 'yes' for the > > reasons listed above for now, revisit with FAS2, as was decided at > > FESCo. > > I missed this part. FESCo has already decided how they want this > handled? And some folks aren't happy with that situation? > > Without FAS2, I don't see a way around this. That is, I guess something > of a click-through CLA could be hacked up, by why spend the time on that > over finishing FAS2? > > - Karsten > -- > Karsten Wade, Developer Community Mgr. > Dev Fu : http://developer.redhatmagazine.com > Fedora : http://quaid.fedorapeople.org > gpg key : AD0E0C41 > > _______________________________________________ > fedora-advisory-board mailing list > fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board > > -- Jon Stanley Fedora Bug Wrangler jstanley@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
