openwhisk-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rodric Rabbah <>
Subject Re: Updating our contributions guide
Date Sat, 13 Jul 2019 23:20:16 GMT
Thanks Matt. One of the improvements I thought I’d make is to explain exactly this: when
a cla is required and when we can accept improvements to documentation, typos, minors fixes
etc. without. 


> On Jul 13, 2019, at 5:07 PM, Matt Sicker <> wrote:
> I've looked around for some existing guidelines around CLA
> requirements, and so far I've found this:
> This relates eventually to the provenance of source code hosted at the ASF:
> So basically, the general idea I've seen is that small, trivial
> changes do not require an ICLA, but anything non-trivial should
> request one in order to establish provenance of the code over time.
> Remember, safe, business-friendly licensing of all our software is the
> key point to address here, so anything we do here should align with
> that. Since trivial contributions are not usually covered by
> copyright, there's no need to establish more formalities around them.
> Larger ones would retain their own new copyright, and the ICLA is
> there to help ensure the contributions are made along the same rules
> as the ALv2.
>> On Tue, 9 Jul 2019 at 03:06, Rodric Rabbah <> wrote:
>> It was pointed out that our contributing guide sets a higher bar than other Apache
projects by requiring an ICLA.
>> Looking at some of the other successful Apache projects they do a better job explaining
how to contribute, and all the ways someone can be contributor, and how to open a PR, testing
and how reviewing works.
>> Should we revise the guidelines and contributions doc? Is anyone else interested
in helping out on these docs?
>> -r
> -- 
> Matt Sicker <>

View raw message