mxnet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Henri Yandell <bay...@apache.org>
Subject Re: ICLAs vs Contributors
Date Fri, 01 Sep 2017 19:28:21 GMT
I've listed the top 100 contributors (as of the other day) on GitHub here:

    https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MXNET/ICLA+Progress

With a check if they have signed an ICLA.

John/Justin - can you confirm that we don't have to get an ICLA signed from
someone whose significant contributions have only been since MXNet came to
Apache? (Assuming it's not such a large piece of work that would flag for
software-grant/ICLA - a new component etc).

--

I'd like us (MXNet) to work our way down the list getting (up to
yanqingmen) ICLAs signed. After that we will review the nature of the next
batch of contributors commits and determine how much more ICLA signing we
need.

Thanks,

Hen


On Tue, Aug 29, 2017 at 10:06 PM, Henri Yandell <bayard@apache.org> wrote:

> (cc to John and Justin as they'd asked about this)
>
> Looking at the current MXNet GitHub contributors list (411 contributors):
>
> We have 36 signed CLAs at this point.
>
> Of the top 36 contributors, the following 15 top contributors aren't
> covered by a CLA:
>
> 8:sneakerkg
> 9:kevinthesun  (post Incubation)
> 17:hjk41
> 18:mavenlin
> 19:tornadomeet
> 20:winstywang
> 21:jermainewang
> 22:qiaohaijun
> 23:vchuravy
> 25:Roshrini  (post Incubation)
> 26:howard0su
> 28:sbodenstein
> 31:ptrendx  (post Incubation)
> 35:zackchase   (post Incubation)
> 36:yanqingmen
>
> Note that some of these are post entering the Incubator.
>
> Some of the 411 contributors we should ask for CLA/SGs from. Those above
> are most likely the first to get agreements signed from, and we need to
> determine how far down the list to go.
>
> The git logs are trickier to use as they don't use the github login; so
> doing an analysis of the diffs themselves is trickier.
>
> Hen
>

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