[ZF] Cleaning up the Zope Software Development Process

[Tres Seaver]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Jim Fulton wrote:

> As I mentioned in a separate thread, I'd like to focus, in the *very
> limited time I have to contribute* on cleaning up the Foundation documents
> relating to the management of the software repository.  This is with the
> goal of making it possible to transfer intellectual property from
> Zope Corporation to the Zope Foundation.  For background on this topic,
> see the "Zope Development Process" thread from September:
> 
>    http://mail.zope.org/pipermail/foundation/2006-September/000142.html
> 
> I'm gong to find some time over the next few days to work up a draft
> amendment to the documents.  My goal is to allow transfer of IP.
> In particular, it is to allow transfer of IP without preventing people
> from contributing (or minimizing this as much as possible).
> 
> Here are the basic things I intend to do:
> 
> - Simplify as much as possible.  If I can rip out section 7, or
>    replace it with something wildly simpler, I will.  Basically, I
>    think we need to spell out a process that, for now, says:

+1 to deleting it wholesale:  it was classic "big design upfront" /
YAGNI.  Let's work on documenting the process we have already, and make
it fit within the context of the foundation.

>    - How one gains commit access to the repository.
> 
>    - How to handle 3rd-party IP in the repository.
>      (A separate, but important issue is how to handle IP
>       on the web site.)
> 
> - Separate membership from commit access.
> 
> My intent is to make this as minimal as I can.  So for
> example, out of scope would be:
> 
> - Renaming "committer" members to "contributor members".
> 
> - Defining a process for inviting new contributor members.
> 
> - Resolving issues with the contributor agreement:
> 
>    o It doesn't provide a needed mechanism for
>      organizations, rather than individuals, to
>      contribute.  This is a bug.

I'm not quite sure how organizations can contribute software:  an
individual with an SSH key has to make the commit, right?  Or are you
thinking something along the lines of a "dontaion" of some large chunk
of IP from an entity no longer vested in maintaining it?

>    o It doesn't allow individuals to contribute without
>      the formal approval of their employers. This is a pain
>      but it is not clearly a bug.  There might be steps
>      that we could take to make the process easier.

Without either that approval, or some kind of affadavit from the
individual stating that their employment agreement / contract /
situation does not impair their ability to contribute without it, I
don't think you can accept the contribution.

> These are important things to do but I need to limit
> my scope to have any chance to accomplish anything.
> Maybe someone else would like to take on some of these
> other points.  For example, the renaming task is a purely
> clerical one, I think.
> 
> Of course there are other bugs in the documents that need to
> be fixed too.
> 
> If anyone disagrees with my approach, speak up, but also
> be prepared to volunteer. :)
> 
> If anyone wants to help me with this, let me know. :)

Overall, the approach seems fine.  I may be able to help a bit next week.


Tres.
- --
===================================================================
Tres Seaver          +1 202-558-7113          tseaver at palladion.com
Palladion Software   "Excellence by Design"    http://palladion.com
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFFYx+c+gerLs4ltQ4RAqMpAJ43Z5qDo1fIypPSO1w1knbchu/mlQCgv1Y0
mi25DmgDHqyY7jI2H8ThWt0=
=l7au
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----