cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jesse <purplecabb...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [DISCUSS] Not requiring an iCLA for contributions
Date Tue, 13 Sep 2016 17:53:58 GMT
Yes, that is the point.  Sending a PR is intent!
BUT if it is a large change, we need insurance that it is the work of the
contributor, and not copy/pasted from somewhere else, and that they cannot
retract it later.  This is what the CLA offers us.
Currently, as Shaz pointed out above, we state firmly that we require an
iCLA, so this will simply state more clearly how we work with PRs.


@purplecabbage
risingj.com

On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 10:46 AM, Joe Bowser <bowserj@gmail.com> wrote:

> So, it's basically the same system that we have now.  I still think we
> should get clear intent from the author, since that's more useful and easy
> than determining whether it's trivial.  I mean, isn't sending a PR through
> GitHub already clear intent?
>
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 10:41 AM, Jesse <purplecabbage@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > You decide per pr if you think it is trivial.
> >
> >
> > @purplecabbage
> > risingj.com
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Joe Bowser <bowserj@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > I'll agree to this, since I don't know what the definition of trivial
> is
> > > w.r.t. Apache.
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 10:30 AM, Jesse <purplecabbage@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > >
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > @purplecabbage
> > > > risingj.com
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 10:27 AM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Bump. There can't be lazy consensus on this. Before I potentially
> > waste
> > > > > time on drafting a proposal, trying to feel the temperature on this
> > > > change.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Shazron <shazron@gmail.com>
wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > It's up to us to decide, and right now we require the iCLA except
> > for
> > > > > > trivial contributions.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I want to change this to a more relaxed requirement:
> > > > > > 1. Non-committers do not require an iCLA (you need one anyway
to
> > get
> > > an
> > > > > > account, so that's really a non-issue)
> > > > > > 2. Require a clear intent by the author to contribute under
our
> > > normal
> > > > > > terms, for a non-trivial change
> > > > > >
> > > > > > So some of you will be wondering, what does Apache say about
> this?
> > > > > > From: http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-infrastru
> > > > > > cture-dev/201112.mbox/%3CA603FFCE-623B-43E9-87F8-
> > > 39BAA51C72D1@gbiv.com
> > > > > %3E
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Roy Fielding:
> > > > > > "Yes, that opinion comes from me speaking as a board member
and
> > > > > > author of the Apache License, and has previously been cleared
> > > > > > with Apache's legal team for a long ago discussion with
> Incubator.
> > > > > > We don't need a CLA on file to accept contributions from
> > > > non-committers.
> > > > > > We just need a clear intent by the author to contribute under
> > > > > > our normal terms."
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Other opinions: http://apetro.ghost.io/apache-
> contributors-no-cla/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We need to change our Contribute page:
> > > > > > http://cordova.apache.org/contribute/
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ... as well as any PR templates:
> > > > > > https://github.com/apache/cordova-plugin-media/blob/master/.
> > > > > > github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This declaration of intent, if posted on Github, will be
> reflected
> > on
> > > > > > dev@cordova.apache.org since Apache sends out an email on each
> PR
> > or
> > > > > > comment to a PR, so we will be able to track it in our archives.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As usual it is always the committer's responsibility to make
sure
> > > that
> > > > > all
> > > > > > code they push to a repository is compliant with ASF policies.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message