On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 1:05 PM, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> wrote: > ICLAs are still an absolute requirement. So, imagine an Apache project with > a policy like: > > Commit rights are granted on request to people with an Apache ICLA on > file ... >
OK. I understand. And I hope we think of "commit rights" in the broad sense. It is more than just SVN. We have other systems where access is keyed to an Apache ID. For example: Pootle, which we use for translations, has an enhanced set of rights that come only with having an ID today. Similarly in Bugzilla, we (OpenOffice project) give extra permissions to those with registered email addresses from apache.org. So for us a very useful thing would be a streamlined way of granting these non-SVN privileges that ordinarily are reserved for committers. Regards, -Rob > > > > On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 1:02 PM, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> wrote: > >> On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Benson Margulies <bimargul...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> . >> . >> . >> > >> > The question at hand here is, 'is this really a good idea? Would project >> > grow and thrive better if they set a lower bar to grant commit rights?' >> > >> >> How does the iCLA fit into any change? Personally I would not mind >> commit rights on request, but I still see the value for a project to >> have iCLA's on file for all those who have such rights. This is to >> protect our users. >> >> -Rob >>
