I believe that you have exactly the right thinking on this subject. Details below.
For simplicity, all contributors in the context of Outreachy or GSoC should just sign ICLAs when the submit first PRs. its going to make things very easy for us and them in the long run.
Yes, having an ICLA on file for all candidates is a good thing.
So as soon as someone sends in their first PR, send them to fill an iCLA form and submit.
This will make it easier to give the person the ability to commit later on if they deserve it.
I wonder if this will add another barrier of entry? as people might get confused about why they need to do that or even be reluctant to fill the form an send.
Here's where diversity gets involved. We should review the FAQ on the license page and see if filling the ICLA might be a barrier to the people we want to attract.
We should proactively look at the FAQ with this in mind and suggest changes if they are warranted.
But if the ICLA is a barrier, it should go into the friction log with suggested changes.
For more info, we have an FAQ here: https://www.apache.org/licenses/cla-faq.html
I forgot to mention that CLAs also apply to patent grants (not many
OSS licenses besides ALv2 and GPLv3 even address patents in scope of
the license AFAIK), though this is more an issue for development done
with corporate resources (I doubt many individuals bother filing
software patents outside a business).
On Fri, 4 Oct 2019 at 10:35, James Bognar <email@example.com> wrote:
> Thank you for the clarification.
> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:32 AM Matt Sicker <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> > CLAs aren’t assigning copyright or anything. It’s asserting that you have the rights to the code being uploaded and are allowing the ASF to use it under the Apache License. For non-trivial contributions made by non-committers, it’s typically up to the PMC to decide whether they can vouch for the contribution themselves or if the contributor should sign an ICLA.
> > Basically, the provenance of all code at Apache should be traceable to committers with an ICLA on file or an initial software grant from the corporation who donated the code base.
> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 10:22, James Bognar <email@example.com> wrote:
> >> Does that mean that I as a committer am legally responsible for
> >> contributions accepted by non-committers? It's not my code, so how
> >> can I grant copyright to it to the Apache Foundation?
> >> Just curious.
> >> On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 11:07 AM Matt Sicker <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Not necessarily. An ICLA is needed to become a committer, and any contributions accepted are committed by people who already signed the ICLA. It can make things easier in the long run to submit an ICLA, though.
> >> >
> >> > On Fri, Oct 4, 2019 at 08:08, James Bognar <email@example.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> Question...
> >> >>
> >> >> Do Outreachy candidates need to submit CLAs in order to make code contributions?
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Matt Sicker <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > --
> > Matt Sicker <email@example.com>
Matt Sicker <firstname.lastname@example.org>