Using CLA assistant for Python contributions
I've posted in Discourse under core-workflow category <https://discuss.python.org/t/using-cla-assistant-for-python/990>, and this has been previously discussed on the core-workflow mailing list <https://mail.python.org/archives/list/core-workflow@python.org/thread/JBV3XJVD2DLDX5DY7TZEA6CO5YPNHJ2C/>, but I feel this affects the wider contributors to Python, so wanted to share it here for more visibility. TL;DR: We'd like to start using CLA assistant for contributions to Python (including CPython, devguide, PEPs, all the bots etc). Ernest had set up our own instance of CLA assistant, and it had been tested by several core developers. We've also consulted The PSF and Van Lindberg for legal advice. Unless I hear strong opposition (with reasons) from Python Steering Council, Python core developers, and active core contributors, I plan to switch us over to to CLA assistant in the coming week (before my OOOS of March 18) How this will affect all contributors to Python old and new: - you will need to sign the CLA again, even if you've signed it before (in bpo). It will take you several clicks, but then you'll do this only once, and it takes effect immediately. (instead of waiting for a PSF staff to check for it) - bpo username will no longer be required when signing the CLA - CLA will be accepted under Apache v2 only (no more Academic Free license) For even more details, please follow the discourse post and the core-workflow mailing list linked above, as well as the "CLA" section of my blog post about Core Python sprint 2018 <https://mariatta.ca/core-sprint-2018-part-2.html#core-sprint-2018-part-2>. Thanks. ᐧ
On Thu, Mar 07, 2019 at 10:49:50AM -0800, Mariatta wrote:
Unless I hear strong opposition (with reasons) from Python Steering Council, Python core developers, and active core contributors, I plan to switch us over to to CLA assistant in the coming week (before my OOOS of March 18)
OOOS? Object Oriented Operating System?
How this will affect all contributors to Python old and new:
- you will need to sign the CLA again, even if you've signed it before (in bpo). It will take you several clicks,
If this is a Github thing, it will probably take me a lot more than several clicks. It will probably take me a whole OS upgrade.
but then you'll do this only once, and it takes effect immediately. (instead of waiting for a PSF staff to check for it)
I don't have an opinion on the specific technology you use for future CLAs. If CLA Assistant is the tool you want to use for future contributors, then go for it. But I think it is ... I need a word weaker than rude ... ill-mannered(?) to ask people to re-sign an agreement they have already signed, without a really good reason. I suppose it can be forgiven if: - the signing process is straight-forward and easy; - and supporting the legacy CLAs is particularly difficult; but if the existing CLAs haven't expired, haven't been revoked, and there's no legal reason why they are no longer in force, then why are you asking us to re-sign? I will if I really must, but I'll feel put out over it. -- Steven
I plan to
switch us over to to CLA assistant in the coming week (before my OOOS of March 18) OOOS?
My Out Of Open Source aka I'm not doing any volunteer activities for 6 weeks (details: https://discuss.python.org/t/mariatta-will-be-ooos-out-of-open-source-starti... )
- the signing process is straight-forward and easy;
Yes it really is straight forward and easy. Everything happens on the browser on GitHub. If you can open GitHub webpage then you can sign the CLA via CLA assistant, no additional program/downloading/command line is needed. It can be done with computer or your modern smartphone or tablet/iPad with internet connection. ᐧ
Thought I'll be a little more clearer: you'll need to re-sign the CLA only for your future contributions (aka when you make new pull request to Python). Your previous CLA record are still available for The PSF, we're just not going to export over data from existing CLA host to CLA assistant. ᐧ ᐧ
On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 at 02:32, Mariatta <mariatta@python.org> wrote:
Thought I'll be a little more clearer: you'll need to re-sign the CLA only for your future contributions (aka when you make new pull request to Python).
My preference would be to just re-sign the CLA *immediately*, and not wait for when I have a PR - I presume that would be possible/supported. Instructions on how to do so when the switchover happens would be useful. Paul PS I would also prefer not to have to re-sign, but just have my existing confirmation carried over. I don't *know* if there are any implications at my end around re-signing, and my preference is simply to not ask that question (on the basis of why make things harder for myself). But if it's needed, then fair enough.
On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 07:25:37AM +0000, Paul Moore wrote:
PS I would also prefer not to have to re-sign, but just have my existing confirmation carried over. I don't *know* if there are any implications at my end around re-signing, and my preference is simply to not ask that question (on the basis of why make things harder for myself). But if it's needed, then fair enough.
Because what you don't know can't hurt you? You're signing a legal document. Shouldn't you understand the implications of signing it before you sign? -- Steven
On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 at 10:39, Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 07:25:37AM +0000, Paul Moore wrote:
PS I would also prefer not to have to re-sign, but just have my existing confirmation carried over. I don't *know* if there are any implications at my end around re-signing, and my preference is simply to not ask that question (on the basis of why make things harder for myself). But if it's needed, then fair enough.
Because what you don't know can't hurt you?
You're signing a legal document. Shouldn't you understand the implications of signing it before you sign?
Sigh. Trust me that I know what I'm saying, please. I do understand the implications. And re-signing a CLA *will* involve different processes for me than a simple continuance of an existing CLA - even if that CLA is confirmed by the PSF as legally identical to the new one. I can, and will, negotiate that difficulty myself if necessary - but honestly, it's not really the place of anyone on this list to tell me what I need to do in order to ensure my compliance with the CLA and with my employer's policies. I offered the information for awareness, to ensure that the people proposing this change knew that it had the potential to incur extra work for people being asked to re-sign, beyond the mere mechanics of re-signing. I did not expect arguments over my understanding of what I needed to do (nor did I expect the Spanish Inquisition, but *nobody* expects that ;-)) Paul
On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 10:58:00AM +0000, Paul Moore wrote:
On Fri, 8 Mar 2019 at 10:39, Steven D'Aprano <steve@pearwood.info> wrote:
On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 07:25:37AM +0000, Paul Moore wrote:
PS I would also prefer not to have to re-sign, but just have my existing confirmation carried over. I don't *know* if there are any implications at my end around re-signing, and my preference is simply to not ask that question (on the basis of why make things harder for myself). But if it's needed, then fair enough.
Because what you don't know can't hurt you?
You're signing a legal document. Shouldn't you understand the implications of signing it before you sign?
Sigh. Trust me that I know what I'm saying, please. I do understand the implications.
I'm sorry Paul, we seem to have difficulty in communicating today. You explicitly said that you did not know if there are any implications for you to re-sign, now you're saying that we ought to trust you that you do know the implications. Forgive me if I'm confused. Oh! I think I get it... when you say you prefer to not to ask the question, you mean in the sense of "Don't make me re-sign, and that way I won't have to ask about the implications of re-signing". Is that what you meant? I'm sorry, I truly read it as "I don't know what the implications are, and I don't want to know, but I'll sign". Communication is hard.
And re-signing a CLA *will* involve different processes for me than a simple continuance of an existing CLA - even if that CLA is confirmed by the PSF as legally identical to the new one.
That's a very good point, and I hope Mariatta is reading :-) Fortunately, I don't have to worry about re-negotiating a new CLA with an employer. But I imagine a lot of people will be in your same situation.
I can, and will, negotiate that difficulty myself if necessary - but honestly, it's not really the place of anyone on this list to tell me what I need to do in order to ensure my compliance with the CLA and with my employer's policies.
Chill out Paul, I'm not your dad and I'm not telling you to clean your room :-) But we are a community, not as close as personal friends, but closer than perfect strangers, and if I see people in my community talking about doing something which may be problematic for them, the kind thing to do is point that out. Sorry if I stepped on your toes by misunderstanding your words. -- Steven
On Thu, Mar 7, 2019 at 11:25 PM Paul Moore <p.f.moore@gmail.com> wrote:
My preference would be to just re-sign the CLA *immediately*, and not wait for when I have a PR - I presume that would be possible/supported.
Yes this is possible, and once the switchover happens, I will post the link with instructions on how to do that.
participants (3)
-
Mariatta -
Paul Moore -
Steven D'Aprano