The Contributor License Agreement (CLA) service of the Linux Foundation lets project contributors read, sign, and submit contributor license agreements easily.
“CLA” is confusing in the JDF context (there isn’t a “CLA”, it’s a membership).
Devs that are already working for a signed member, who show up new not listed on a CLA approved list - don’t let them sign the Individual CLA workflow if they’re using a member domain email address.
What is the next step if you click the left or right option. The text on the page is not clear what they’re going to be asked to do next or what they’re committing to.
The “Download PDF” button is confusing - should be a “Preview Agreement” or something like that.
Cosmetic changes to clarify what this is and what is happening next if you click Corporate or Individual.
“CLA” is confusing in the JDF context (there isn’t a “CLA”, it’s a membership).
Devs that are already working for a signed member, who show up new not listed on a CLA approved list - don’t let them sign the Individual CLA workflow if they’re using a member domain email address.
What is the next step if you click the left or right option. The text on the page is not clear what they’re going to be asked to do next or what they’re committing to.
The “Download PDF” button is confusing - should be a “Preview Agreement” or something like that.
Cosmetic changes to clarify what this is and what is happening next if you click Corporate or Individual.
Maybe a JDF specific overview page version of this: https://contributor.easycla.lfx.linuxfoundation.org/#/cla/project/03cdfdf8-ab62-4120-8d1d-a9924fef2e02/user/f6efce93-eb9f-4d05-9499-856c194468b9?redirect=https:%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fmargo%2FEasyCLA%2Fpull%2F2
When used for JDF, Individual vs Corporate CLA conflicts with the reality of agreements which are “Member vs Non-Member”.
“Already a Member” and “Not a Current Member” perhaps?
New Bug: When clicking on the PDF download to get a copy of the agreement, they get a prompt about a stale link and when clicking Yes nothing happens.