From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 38AF3138334 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 22:11:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AAFCBE0A70; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 22:10:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-pf0-f169.google.com (mail-pf0-f169.google.com [209.85.192.169]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 40E32E0A6B for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 22:10:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-pf0-f169.google.com with SMTP id x23-v6so3157686pfn.11 for ; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 15:10:43 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=6IWTCLSW2CthD62kyg8eyrAxCWB2jEfGes+12Owzp08=; b=pdcMJoTnq9RJLevm8npUhNQL3IiTf6BwvuzMFEsxWO61fLPNhGyb7boyHreK7PUPc0 AAFGdI8hSp/93WLs6AZ6yJUtvcQrW9QbTTgZETTqUcbyjFYtPOWEiz06i+FXcCRWrLXO YPmo0mMYbbKWCImxomQLcC39QkX37JuKzbWGyQst3oEo7nBbHzMvjhrvxKAfAZt6S1C2 jI6JFdplAn/EmwXev0cbYU3QWOk5kxTeK/Z1oZas2Tt0H320E4TDwxWrisG5xcFmkjc0 z6yz0FeWaKUM79z7rxhswews8C73jQdsob2YKZsS7HVqDaUDy7J050GIY5cRKhyXIbUo ALfw== X-Gm-Message-State: APt69E1L0HVEymhB3spvq2F+Iyt0dlEAnbatDHdl04QeWGCKVbzrSRVs 9FBcGZUydJi86SIrYPEieWicLHPX5LKY/cgAf23HKQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ADUXVKJ8QgHULxxpS2It/dTzb4dWPoMmO8nHwkSqqyZawPqDudcC18Gwq6qA+Iyj68JRJo/pQkNZSk8mgCws0gwbwnI= X-Received: by 2002:a63:4244:: with SMTP id p65-v6mr12102440pga.432.1529964641782; Mon, 25 Jun 2018 15:10:41 -0700 (PDT) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <23310.46809.293787.611345@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <23317.12829.91552.529904@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20180625013334.GA28404@kroah.com> <23344.37042.753481.563752@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20180625070525.GA6151@kroah.com> <23344.40875.105369.227774@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20180625110540.GB3058@kroah.com> <23344.65054.620110.958503@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <0a9228f1-338e-06a3-f3f4-6b27eea71408@iee.org> <23345.22853.286956.293051@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> In-Reply-To: <23345.22853.286956.293051@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> From: Rich Freeman Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2018 18:10:29 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: [gentoo-core] Re: Poll: Would you sign a Contributer License Agreement? To: gentoo-project Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Archives-Salt: 128fab1a-9501-49ad-b38c-ad88b2a5e850 X-Archives-Hash: 2af790bac7e1270e4ff8a1332fd75336 On Mon, Jun 25, 2018 at 5:06 PM Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > >>>>> On Mon, 25 Jun 2018, Denis Dupeyron wrote: > > > I have no opinion of the document itself, whatever it is. I was just > > making you guys aware that if this did happen, I and a bunch of others > > will be asked to stop contributing in any form until the document, > > whether good or bad, was reviewed and us allowed to sign it. > > Note that technically, you don't _sign_ the certificate of origin > (you would sign the FLA/CLA but we've dropped it, in the meantime). > The only thing that will be required is adding a Signed-off-by line to > commits, in order to certify that the contribution is under a free > license. > Not sure I completely agree with the wording of your email, but in general the DCO is a unilateral statement, not an agreement or a contract. It seems odd that an employer would have any concerns with signing a statement of this kind. Maybe if the Gentoo contribution was a work for hire it might have a bit of bearing. I'm not sure how many Gentoo contributions are actually works for hire though. Outside of work done on company time that is owned by my employer, the place I work at doesn't have any restrictions on stuff I sign outside of work. Though, it seems like the tech industry is full of over-reach like this. In any case, I think Denis's comment should be taken for what it is - a note that it could cause issues for some. I do think it would be helpful if people chimed in with "I checked at work and I can't sign this" rather than "somebody somewhere might have a problem with this." I'm hearing a lot more of the latter than the former. We could always approve the GLEP, then if everybody in the world says they've been told they can't sign the DCO we can always un-approve the GLEP. It doesn't take anything more than a vote and a git hook change. Why people would wait to the last minute is beyond me, but then again apparently somebody was complaining in IRC the other day about being booted after not committing in a few years and not checking his email for six months and therefore not replying to multiple messages asking if he wanted to still be a dev... -- Rich