In the fashion I mentioned, it doesn't bypass the our governance. One of the issues we always have to contend with is the DCO. It still requires that the Dev that is ultimately bringing something into our ecosystem is doing some level of due diligence. But this isn't a new risk.
Sent from my iPad > On Sep 26, 2016, at 7:28 AM, Heather Kirksey <hkirk...@linuxfoundation.org> > wrote: > > Lots of good thoughts here. > > One other thing is the legal aspect -- I know that developers don't > necessarily like lawyers and don't like legal constraints impinging on their > innovation and their work. On the other hand, as an open source project that > holds the communal IP for important work for our industry, we have to be > mindful of our IPR rules and enforcement of them; otherwise we open ourselves > up to some thorny legal situations that can really get in the way of what > we're trying to accomplish. Many of our (not currently strongly enforced) > policies around OPNFV repo usage are influenced by that. > > That's not to say our current default is the only way to do things, but if we > start to explore some other things we do have to keep that sort of thing in > mind. > >> On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 1:59 PM, Ashlee Young <a...@wildernessvoice.com> >> wrote: >> I can make a meeting on 10/6, but will be on my way back from Disney :) >> >> So, previously, I had my Github location as my primary spot, which worked >> great for trying to build up a community. It was easier than the current >> private Gerrit arrangement. But it also has a downside. After discussion >> with the other TSC members, I changed the flow up and I made the >> Gerrit.opnfv.org repo the primary and then made the Github location the >> mirror. >> >> These are things I had to deal with: >> >> 1) Create a robot to update the mirror as Gerrit changes. This was also >> built into my build script. But a robot kinda has to be in place to keep the >> two locations in sync. >> >> 2) The problem on the Github side is that there's no real place to tie into >> the Gerrit workflow. So I made a quarantine area for people to upload a >> directory structure and some code for us to verify and test. This made it >> easy to accept contributions in the mirror. But it ensure they were going to >> be out of sync with Gerrit. >> >> By the way, all additions are out of sync with Gerrit unless you're on the >> review. So I don't see why this is new for the committers. >> >> 3) Since the same code has to be reviewed by the same reviewers, really the >> only extra step is to get the code then from the Github side to the >> appropriate Gerrit folder location. This would have to be done by either a >> committer or contributor with Gerrit access. If done by a committer, it >> could be done with a +2 if the code had already been reviewed on the Github >> side. >> >> 4) Downsides of the process is that while the outside contributor can be >> viewed as the contributor in the original Github side of things and even in >> the copyrights, he/she won't show in the statistics because the final commit >> will have to be someone with access to the project in Gerrit. >> >> Then again, let's not forget that someone on the outside can easily obtain >> Gerrit access. They don't need to be a member. One of us in the community >> could easily walk them through stuff to be added. This is merely to ensure >> the directories and the community is broadly viewable by the outside world, >> so that we can get them to help us, or to at least use what we've developed. >> And that's key. At the end of the day, we also want our code re-used. >> >> I hope this helps some. >> >> Best, >> >> Ash >> >> Sent from my iPad >> >>> On Sep 26, 2016, at 3:10 AM, Raymond Paik <rp...@linuxfoundation.org> wrote: >>> >>> Luke, >>> >>> "External" repos is something we want to have a discussion on in early/mid >>> October (borrowing Bin's Thursday Technical Community Discussion mtg.) >>> >>> In OpenStack, if someone contributes to the github repo, do some of those >>> github contributions also get "moved" to the main OpenStack repo? If yes, >>> how is that done? My understanding is that you also need a contributor >>> agreement in OpenStack >>> (https://ask.openstack.org/en/question/89871/does-the-company-need-to-be-a-member-of-the-foundation-in-order-for-employees-to-contribute-code-on-behalf-of-the-company/) >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Ray >>> >>>> On Sun, Sep 25, 2016 at 9:54 AM, Luke Hinds <lhi...@redhat.com> wrote: >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I am sure this might have already been discussed, if so apologies. >>>> >>>> Is there any reason we don't mirror our repos to github (similar as >>>> happens with openstack). >>>> >>>> I ask as it could encourage more developers to get involved by increasing >>>> exposure (especially for independents). >>>> >>>> We already have an org in place https://github.com/opnfv >>>> >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Luke >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Luke Hinds | NFV Partner Engineering | Office of Technology | Red Hat >>>> e: lhi...@redhat.com | irc: lhinds @freenode | m: +44 77 45 63 98 84 | t: >>>> +44 12 52 36 2483 >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list >>>> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org >>>> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list >>> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org >>> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss >> >> _______________________________________________ >> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list >> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org >> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss >> > > > > -- > Heather Kirksey > Director, OPNFV > Mobile: +1.512.917.7938 > Email/Google Talk: hkirk...@linuxfoundation.org > Skype: HeatherReneeKirksey > IRC: HKirksey > >
_______________________________________________ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
