#4806 It's time to bite the bullet and change occurances of "CLA" to "FPCA".
Closed: Upstream 5 years ago Opened 8 years ago by mattdm.

problem

Once, Fedora had something called a CLA. In 2011, we migrated away from that to the FPCA, to make it more clear that this was not a copyright assignment. However, to reduce work, we kept the name "cla" in many places, perhaps most prominently in "cla_done". This causes user confusion — they are unsure what a CLA is and how to get one to be "done" when there isn't one. And, it causes some degree of FUD.

analysis

It's not trivial and may break things, but eventually, we should bite the bullet and get rid of all references to "CLA".


I think when we roll out fas3 later this year would be a good time to fix this.

When we do this, we need to be careful to only remove references to inactive CLA bits. For example, "cla_ibm" still exists and is at least being used somewhat. I can help with determining relevance.

Also, we should nuke "cla_redhat" at the same time, and well before we do that, we should look through the list of accounts in that group, subtract any accounts which have signed the FPCA, and then send them an email letting them know that they will need to agree to the FPCA in FAS before NN/NN/20NN or they may lose access to other "FPCA" dependent groups. We also need to keep a record of who was in cla_redhat, just in case we ever have a legal issue related to an ancient contribution. This can be in an encrypted email to me and other admins.

This can now be done as part of moving to CAIAPI (see post to infra list about auth roadmap).

Ideally, I would love to drop all spamcheck and inactive accounts, and clean up this cla stuff as well.

Look for a more detailed plan when we have one...

Metadata Update from @kevin:
- Issue priority set to: Waiting on External

5 years ago

Metadata Update from @kevin:
- Issue priority set to: Next Meeting (was: Waiting on External)

5 years ago

We are going to keep this here until CAAPI is further along and we can track it there...

Metadata Update from @kevin:
- Issue priority set to: Waiting on Assignee (was: Next Meeting)

5 years ago

And it exists!

https://pagure.io/CAIAPI/issue/2

Please move discussion over there and we can try and make sure we get this better in caiapi.

:water_buffalo:

Metadata Update from @kevin:
- Issue close_status updated to: Upstream
- Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)

5 years ago

Login to comment on this ticket.

Metadata