From dev-return-5598-apmail-couchdb-dev-archive=couchdb.apache.org@couchdb.apache.org Thu Aug 06 15:41:09 2009 Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 50573 invoked from network); 6 Aug 2009 15:41:09 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 6 Aug 2009 15:41:09 -0000 Received: (qmail 47325 invoked by uid 500); 6 Aug 2009 15:41:16 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-couchdb-dev-archive@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 47261 invoked by uid 500); 6 Aug 2009 15:41:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@couchdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@couchdb.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@couchdb.apache.org Received: (qmail 47251 invoked by uid 99); 6 Aug 2009 15:41:16 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 Aug 2009 15:41:16 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests= X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.9] (HELO minotaur.apache.org) (140.211.11.9) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with SMTP; Thu, 06 Aug 2009 15:41:13 +0000 Received: (qmail 50520 invoked by uid 99); 6 Aug 2009 15:40:46 -0000 Received: from localhost.apache.org (HELO [10.0.1.2]) (127.0.0.1) (smtp-auth username kocolosk, mechanism plain) by minotaur.apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 06 Aug 2009 15:40:46 +0000 Message-Id: From: Adam Kocoloski To: dev@couchdb.apache.org In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v935.3) Subject: Re: Uneasiness with use of github for experimentation Date: Thu, 6 Aug 2009 11:40:51 -0400 References: <399A2534-FBBB-4D0E-A7C9-A04AB0E175BA@apache.org> <75C34F7A-20D3-4B88-8AB8-D917B410B169@dionne-associates.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.935.3) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Aug 6, 2009, at 9:31 AM, Stephan Wehner wrote: > On Thu, Aug 6, 2009 at 6:21 AM, Jan Lehnardt wrote: >> >> On 6 Aug 2009, at 15:13, Robert Dionne wrote: >> >>> Git really encourages a more distributed, less centralized >>> approach to >>> development, that allows the centers of gravity to move as they >>> evolve. This >>> is a good and healthy thing in many contexts, perhaps less so in >>> others. >>> >>> I'm not sure what the issue is with respect to the CLA. What >>> prevents you >>> from representing a contribution as your original work because it >>> originated >>> in GitHub? How does playing in an internal Apache sandbox solve >>> that? >> >> All ASF committers singed a CLA that says all work committed has >> been done >> by the committer or has gone through incubator IP clearance. If you >> get a >> patch on github, that is not your work, when you then commit that, >> you break >> the CLA. If you do sole development on github, no problem, but github >> encourages the code-collaboration. > > I don't quite understand. To me the solution is: > > Then you shouldn't commit patches through git that are not based on > your work? > > The difference between git / subversion here is that git makes it > easier for others to > fork. But what goes into your repository is still under your control. > > What am I missing? > > Stephan Hi Stephan, I think you've got it. If someone sends me a pull request on GitHub, I can't apply the patch to some feature I'm working on and then commit the result to ASF SVN. I have to ask that the patch be submitted to JIRA (where the submitter explicitly selects an ASF license) instead. I hope that as long as all the committers are clear on the ground rules we can continue to develop on git/github. I'm too enamored of distributed version control to go back to SVN branches willingly. Adam