incubator-callback-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Brian>
Subject Re: Contributions policy for those with no ICLA
Date Thu, 16 Feb 2012 18:57:19 GMT
There is no nefarious plan to patch bomb Apache Cordova and any
indication that might be the case is plain wrong. I think this might
be a slight cultural disconnect. Apache is new to us and we them.
Traditionally, in our long 3 year heritage =P, we've been *very* good
with ensuring CLAs signed. (At least, since the IBMers came involved.)

Where we and Apache differ is in commit access. In the past, if you
had a decent contribution and a CLA then we made that person a full
committer. (No vote.)

This is likely the root src of the concern identified by Ross.

Its a practice we borrowed from the Rubinious project and one Apache
would benefit from. The concept puts community, individual
accountability and trust on a level playing field. There is no
hierarchy. Only people, and code. Our tools ensure history is
preserved so there is literally no objection to security or safety.

I also feel this policy is why PhoneGap (now Cordova) was able to move
so quickly and across so many platforms. 7 operating systems in 3
years. Not bad!

Certain I'm opening a can of worms here but I really do feel the 'vote
a committer in' policy puts an unnecessary barrier to community,
contribution and adoption.

On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Shazron <> wrote:
>> "I assume the RIM folks intend on contributing significant IP they own to
>> Apache (ie, code they have written)."
>> However, as noted in my mails and corrected by Jukka, if these
>> contributions are coming through git pull requests it's not an issue.
> Glad to get this clarified. In my situation - an employee of
> Salesforce sent a pull request (his code contribution was not
> significant IP - the contribution is out in the open in one of the
> older repos). I knew a little bit of Apache policy in that not all
> contribs need a iCLA (if they are trivial contribs), but I erred on
> the safe side and requested an iCLA from the individual. He replied
> back that Salesforce itself has submited a CCLA so I didn't know if
> that was adequate to pull in the changes.

View raw message