couchdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mikeal Rogers <>
Subject Re: CouchDB Wiki / Documentation
Date Sun, 07 Mar 2010 00:38:26 GMT
Because we hope that people who don't write code and don't know how to
generate diffs and use JIRA contribute to our documentation.

We can provide the same providence and copyright assurances outside of
JIRA. It's a checkbox, it's not hard.


On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 4:29 PM, Noah Slater <> wrote:
> Why? It's not about process per se, it's about providence and copyright assurances.
> On 7 Mar 2010, at 00:24, Mikeal Rogers wrote:
>> I think for social and community reasons requiring the same process
>> for doc changes as we do for code contributions is a huge barrier to
>> documentation contributions.
>> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 4:11 PM, Noah Slater <> wrote:
>>> Oh, technically we could. The issue here is social and organisational.
>>> On 6 Mar 2010, at 23:35, Paul Davis wrote:
>>>> On Sat, Mar 6, 2010 at 12:22 PM, Noah Slater <>
>>>>> On 6 Mar 2010, at 16:48, Jan Lehnardt wrote:
>>>>>>> That cannot happen. The official site is kept in ASF Subversion.
>>>>>> This is orthogonal to the rest of the proposal.
>>>>> No it's not.
>>>>> The main site has to be from Subversion, and any additions or merges
to Subversion have to be provided by someone who has signed a copyright agreement, or checked
the box in JIRA, or otherwise indicated that they are allowed to contribute the work, and
are happy for it to be licensed the way it will be licensed.
>>>> Noah,
>>>> Can you point me to the information concerning the main site being
>>>> required to be served from SVN? The FAQ [1] for the Confluence wiki
>>>> explicitly covers using a dump as a project's main site, so I can't
>>>> fathom that we wouldn't be able to pull in a subdirectory from outside
>>>> SVN. The restrictions covered in the FAQ are that we can't put user
>>>> contributions into a release tarball or in SVN, but no one is
>>>> suggesting that since it'd require all contributions to be covered by
>>>> an ICLA or similar.
>>>> AFAICT, this would be equivalent to us mirroring the coverage reports
>>>> generated by buildbot.
>>>> Paul
>>>> [1]

View raw message