On Fri, Jan 18, 2013 at 1:33 PM, Andy Fingerhut <andy.finger...@gmail.com> wrote: > The issue that Clojure, its contrib libraries, and ClojureScript do not > accept github pull requests has been brought up several times before on this > email list in the past. Feel free to search the Google group for terms like > "pull request". Short answer: Rich Hickey prefers a workflow of evaluating > patches, not pull requests. It is easier for him.
My understanding is that with pull requests it becomes much harder to provide accountability for Intellectual Property which is a legal concern, and that's why we have a Contributor's Agreement. The patch process naturally falls out of the legal CA-covered process since each patch is clearly identified as "belonging" to a specific contributor - and submitting a patch comes with the responsibility of vouching for the legal status of that submission. Github's pull request process makes it all too easy to incorporate code that belongs to a Github account holder who is not covered by the legal agreement and places the burden of verification on screeners to verify the IP ownership. But let's not re-hash the issue of the CA. Folks can just read the archives and there's really nothing new to add... -- Sean A Corfield -- (904) 302-SEAN An Architect's View -- http://corfield.org/ World Singles, LLC. -- http://worldsingles.com/ "Perfection is the enemy of the good." -- Gustave Flaubert, French realist novelist (1821-1880) -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en
