FTR here's some more explanations about the role of a CLA: http://julien.ponge.org/blog/in-defense-of-contributor-license-agreements/
Fiduciary License Agreement (FLA) are also interesting: http://fsfe.org/activities/ftf/fla.en.html Thanks -Vincent On Jan 17, 2013, at 11:19 AM, Vincent Massol <vinc...@massol.net> wrote: > Hi devs, > > I'd like to propose the following: > * That we start asking for a CLA for contributions (and also for current > committers) > * That we keep the process lightweight in order to not make it harder to > contribute to the xwiki project. For this I propose to use > http://www.clahub.com/ > > In order to understand why we need a CLA read: > * http://www.oss-watch.ac.uk/resources/cla > * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Contributor_License_Agreement > > If we agree we then need to define our CLA. I think a good starting point > could be the Node.js one: > http://nodejs.org/cla.html > > Now I don't think the CLA will have any legal value if we cannot define "the > XWiki project" as a legal entity. > > Thus I believe we need to start by joining some foundation or creating one. > > I'll list some easy possibilities: > * SF Conservancy: http://sfconservancy.org/members/current/ > * SPI: http://www.spi-inc.org/projects/ > * Create our own Not for profit association > > Harder possibilities (need to change license, rename project, etc): > * Join ASF > * Join Eclipse (and be forced to use bugzilla as the issue tracker ;)) > > We also need to check if OW2 could offer that service of being a legal entity > for XWiki. > > Personally I'm tempted more by our own association (it's quite easy to create > one if we don't need to accept money and a bit more complex if we want to > accept money but still doable). My second choice goes to SFC. > > WDYT? > > Thanks > -Vincent > _______________________________________________ devs mailing list devs@xwiki.org http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
