Repository access to community, inconsistencies of Terms of Use

[kgoergen]

This is a minor issue, @larsbuntemeyer @jesusff, Lars and Chus, but I feel it causes inconsistencies and potentially confusion.

Motivation for this issue:
The files we keep in this repo are important for the efficient use of jsc-cordex. They are manually kept up to date with the jsc-cordex:/mnt/CORDEX_CMIP6_tmp/READMEs, so all have access to these files. But also under the official evaluation Google Drive directory there is a (potentially not up to date) PDF version of the README.md and there is a different licence file, called "Agreement on data usage".

1. Was there a particular reason why jsc-cordex within https://github.com/euro-cordex is non-public. To the best of my understanding we do not reveal any security related secrets. So I suggest to make it public. This way we can share this repo with all who participate in the study.
2. The PRIVACY_STATEMENT.md was called "privacy policy", now there is a mix of wording in the document and the filename, hence I suggest to go for either one, "privacy statement", I do not think this changes the meaning really.
3. The LICENSE.md file was called "Terms of Use", and I think here it matters to rename this file back to ToU, as it is not a license, it is a ToU. I guess "license" got introduced more from a technical point of view as there shall be no repo without a license. Suggestion: rename to its original Terms of Use.
4. The LICENSE.md file, no matter how it is called, differs from the Agreement on data usage as stored on the Google Drive; the GD version is shorter and in essence says the same thing, albeit some content, such as the requirement to also acknowledge jsc-cordex is missing. Suggestion: merge the two files, maintain perhaps a copy on GDrive and one master here in this repo, as this ToU goes beyond the sole use of data form and on jsc-cordex.

Maybe I missed some discussion and / or aspects on the matter of using github entirely vs a mix of github and GDrive.

[jesusff]

Hi Klaus, I agree on all points:

1. I see no problem in opening this repo (Lars?)

2-3. Lars renamed these files, which I guess have a special meaning for Github (at least the LICENSE.md does). We should decide on the Policy/Statement wording and use it consistently in the filename and text. I have no preference here.

4. Yes, these two files should be merged.

If you all agree, I can make a proposal to fix all this. We could remove the README-How-To copy from GD and use the other file on data usage to simply point to this repo for the details. I ping also @ClaasTeichmann and @SvenKotlarski

[kgoergen]

Hi Chus, @jesusff , thanks. I can also help / do the required fixes, no problem. :-) I already touched upon the issue with Sven, @SvenKotlarski, bilaterally briefly, as I was not sure who may have access to this repo and this issue board; we may discuss in Hamburg during the EURO-CORDEX GA25 meeting, but this is a minor thing and could certainly be clarified beforehand.

[SvenKotlarski]

OK, found it, thanks ;-)

[larsbuntemeyer]

I agree with opening these infos, of course! Sorry for the confusion with file naming, the renaming was in deed some standard github vocabualry. I guess, we probably got out of sync between the google and github here. I would like to move the jsc-cordex related files to a subolder (maybe docs) in joint-evaluation repo and keep this repo secret since it runs the cron job in a github workflow (i could also create another repo for that, if you would like to have jsc cordex docs seprate). I also agree with merging out of sync files!

[larsbuntemeyer]

The project board is also open (i collected there some draft issues as well based on the first presentation in the first joint evaluation meeting)...

[larsbuntemeyer]

The repo is now public, i moved repo secrets to another repo.

[kgoergen]

Thanks much @larsbuntemeyer.
Re-naming I will do.
Syncing content of Terms of Use we probably do with a few, maybe during the GA, with @jesusff and @SvenKotlarski.

[kgoergen]

Renaming is done of Terms of Use is done, consistency in Privacy Statement is done.