launchpad-dev team mailing list archive

[curtis Hovey <curtis.hovey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 11/09/2011 08:27 AM, Matthew Revell wrote:
>> Do new versions always require new signing?
> 
> Yes and no.
> 
> If I were signing a new paper contract, I would expect that my consent
> applied to the exact version I were signing. Even if the changes are
> only to correct typos, I would consider myself bound only by the
> version I'd signed. Whether that'd hold up in law, I dunno, but we can
> be better than lawyers, right? :)

Understood. The Ubuntu CoC has had changes to fix grammar, and it has
had new sentences. Both cases were considered to not require a resigning
by the user. This is largely because it is not possible to Lp to sign on
behalf of the user, nor does Lp support the notification and superseded
signings. I delete my current signed CoC, then sign the new one.
...

>> How do team admins know that users need to sign an agreement.
> 
> I'm not sure I understand. Do you mean, how do they know if a team
> applicant has yet to sign the agreement?

When I upload a new agreement that I need all team members to sign, I
think I need a report to show who has not signed, I need to contact them
again or deactivate their membership.

...

> I'm uncomfortable with [proposed rule], because there's an expectation that teams
> would be able to hold people to account against an agreement they
> hadn't actually signed, even if the differences we only typo
> corrections. I'd be happier with:
> 
>>    * User can upload a version that supersedes a previous agreement.
>>      * The agreement may need to invalidate previous signed agreements and require team members to re-sign to retain their membership.
>>      * The agreement may co-exist with one or more previous versions and it is clear to the team members which version each person has agreed to.

Understood.


-- 
Curtis Hovey
http://launchpad.net/~sinzui

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature