On 3/24/24 07:35, Ihor Radchenko wrote:
+New contributors need to submit the
[[https://orgmode.org/request-assign-future.txt][form]] to the FSF.
+#+begin_center
...
+TODO: Get updated version of form from Emacs maintainers that includes the
line asking the secretary to send confirmation to interested parties (i.e. the
Org maintainers).
+#+end_center
I think that we are not very accurate here.
According to
https://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Copyright-Papers:
Once the conversation is under way and the contributor is ready for more
details, you should send one of the templates that are found in the
directory /gd/gnuorg/Copyright/; they are also available from the
doc/Copyright/ directory of the gnulib project at
https://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnulib. This section explains which
templates you should use in which circumstances. Please don’t use any of
the templates except for those listed here, and please don’t change the
wording.
We must use a specific form from a specific URL.
That isn't how the Emacs maintainers handle it. They send a form by
email when asked, or direct users to use the one in the Emacs git repo.
AFAICT, they are equivalent, if not identical.
Regardless, it would be nice to have a canonical answer to this. The
gnu.org site says one thing, the emacs.git repo says another,
org-mode.git says another, the people on the mailing say another, and
Worg says another--all slightly different for no apparent reason.
(There's also the Emacs manual, which probably mentions it too.)
Also, about the changes to the FSF form that Stefan mentioned in
https://yhetil.org/emacs-devel/jwvh6hne6nv.fsf-monnier+em...@gnu.org/
It does not look like they are official yet. See
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnulib/2024-03/msg00060.html
AFAICT the only change is the line that asks the FSF to send additional
confirmation to some other interested parties. Does that need to be
officially official in order to use it? The alternative is having the
contributor ask by writing in the email message, which seems equivalent.
IOW, it doesn't change the form, it just adds an extra request.
+The assignment process does not always go quickly; occasionally it may
+get stuck or overlooked at the FSF. The contact at the FSF for this
+is: =copyright-clerk AT fsf DOT org=. In rare cases, an inquiry from an
+Org maintainer gets the process moving again.
I may be missing something, but the last sentence now reads like our
(Org maintainer's) inquiry rarely works.
The previous version is very different, IMHO:
-Emails from the paper submitter have been ignored in the past, but an
-email from the maintainers of Org mode has usually fixed such cases
-within a few days.
I would have preferred to omit all the language about the process
sometimes not going quickly or smoothly; it doesn't seem necessary or
helpful to publish such words, because they seem accusatory toward the
FSF volunteers. But in the spirit of preserving earlier contributors'
intent rather than erasing it and just putting my own words, I left it.
