Hi 2012/3/22 Jürgen Schmidt <jogischm...@googlemail.com>: > if possible they can work offline, submit patches ... > > As I mentioned it is always good to start with a iCLA as first step to > become a committer over time.
I think that we can do this two things in separated ways, Jürgen. Maybe a new volunteer wish only write a new document or help in translation, without the flag of committer. > Do you think this people have a problem with that? I think that they haven't problem with iCLA, but yet not is the way (IMHO). We can treat this question with a different approach. Please, give me the chance to bring a good strategy that i saw and i believe to be a good way. In translation part of launchpad, the forge of Canonical, when you register in there system you need to agree with the terms, where says that all contributions in that system will be licensed under BSD license. We could work in the same model, giving the chance for all in register in Pootle under this condition - he agree that all translation's contributions are licensed under Apache's License - giving the "translator" profile. If this volunteer agrees with the sign of iCLA, can be promoted to committer and follows the normal "climb" if this is his wish. The same can be used in the wiki pages. This step can save us of legal problems and rationalize the process, giving for us more agility inside our process. What you think? And our Apache's mentors? With this care, we can receive (more) easily this new volunteers/contributions in a legal way, and recognize/track all contributions. I think this questions is important to maintain this project as an all, and looking others problems (arriving), like spellchekers, thesaurus, and others language tools that (how it was developed in GPL/LGPL mode for attempt OOo, and after LibO) will be necessary to be remade under Apache. Is the case of all pt-BR tools, what will hinder the adoption of AOO here. :-/ Well, can we use a more flexible way to accept this contributions, yet inside of Apache's rules? Best, Claudio
