On 6/7/12 11:54 AM, Ross Gardler wrote: > On 7 June 2012 10:47, Jürgen Schmidt <jogischm...@googlemail.com> wrote: >> On 6/7/12 11:28 AM, Ross Gardler wrote: >>> On 7 June 2012 05:50, Herbert Duerr <h...@apache.org> wrote: >>> >>> ... >>> >>>> I think we maybe should add one more topic here: Working with pootle >>>> currently requires committership, which results in translators having >>>> having >>>> to be fast-tracked when they show up on the mailing list. The board needs >>>> to >>>> decide if this short-circuiting of the process is desirable or not and what >>>> the alternatives are. >>> >>> No, need, that's not a board level issue. It's up to the project to define >>> its >>> own expectations of committers. >> >> it's a very bad limitation. I would prefer a user management which >> allows registration (by email verification) of new users and where new >> users agree to contribute under the Apache license. Maybe combined with >> an iCLA but not necessarily require to be committer. >> >> But I am not sure if something like that would be possible at all. >> >> Otherwise we have to deal with the current approach and hope that we can >> reach volunteers to accept this approach and work together with them on >> a fast-track. > > I agree that the limitation suboptimal. > > I suggest someone take this up with legal-discuss@ If legal@ feel able > to approve a more relaxed approach to iCLAs for access to Pootle then > infra@ can be asked to find a technical solution.
I agree and thanks to remind me that I should take the appropriate action to address things like that ;-) Juergen
