On Fri, Apr 18, 2008 at 8:57 PM, Roy T. Fielding <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've wasted too much time today on the stupid IP Clearance template > that insists on asking a bunch of irrelevant questions about > decisions that the Incubator is not responsible for making. > The required IP clearance questions should be: > > Date: > Identify the Contribution: > Identify the Contributor(s): > What are the filenames for the applicable > software grant(s): > Corporate CLA(s): > Individual CLA(s): > Location of initial import: > Destination PMC: > > That's it.
pretty much agree the VOTE link is useful but maybe the incubator doesn't need to check that a PMC is conducting it's affairs correctly. not clear how much oversight the board expects the incubator to perform for IP clearances. > Licensing the artifacts, removal of dependencies, changing headers, > and checking for product trade names are all activities of the PMC > before a release is made, NOT before an import. Committer access > is a responsibility of the destination PMC. Prior distribution > rights are irrelevant. Where on earth did this crap come from? dunno. stuff only gets fixed once someone notices it's wrong. it's CTR so feel free to remove the cruft. > The template reads like a friggin nanny's club treatise on the > correct angle to wipe one's ass. The only reason we have this > form is to record the connection between grant and initial commit. > Don't waste our time with anything else. :-) IMHO writing documentation is tough and it's hard to target the audience correctly. probably an annotated template would work better (if anyone has some spare cycles to implement). - robert --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
