Pulling this in (docs) plus the 23 PRs for all the plugins. On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 12:59 AM, Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com> wrote:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CB-11916 proceeding with a docs PR. > > On Fri, Sep 16, 2016 at 4:12 PM, Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Ok looks like we have consensus. I'll add a section here: >> http://cordova.apache.org/contribute/ and send a PR to the cordova-docs >> repo for comment. >> >> On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 11:37 AM, Steven Gill <stevengil...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> +1 >>> >>> On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Simon MacDonald < >>> simon.macdon...@gmail.com >>> > wrote: >>> >>> > +1 to making it easier to allow people to contribute trivial changes. >>> > >>> > One thing Shaz just mentioned was adding a check box the the PR >>> template so >>> > that people can explicitly indicate their intent. >>> > >>> > Eventually it would be nice to be able to digitally sign the CLA. >>> > >>> > Simon Mac Donald >>> > http://hi.im/simonmacdonald >>> > >>> > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 11:01 AM, Shazron <shaz...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> > >>> > > An easy definition of trivial IMO is "if they decide to pull this >>> code >>> > away >>> > > from us, is it not a big deal?" >>> > > >>> > > The reasons why the code needs to be pulled, who knows what lurks in >>> the >>> > > minds of lawyers. Typos, doc changes, one liners, are not a big deal >>> > > usually. >>> > > >>> > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 10:53 AM, Jesse <purplecabb...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> > > >>> > > > Yes, that is the point. Sending a PR is intent! >>> > > > BUT if it is a large change, we need insurance that it is the work >>> of >>> > the >>> > > > contributor, and not copy/pasted from somewhere else, and that they >>> > > cannot >>> > > > retract it later. This is what the CLA offers us. >>> > > > Currently, as Shaz pointed out above, we state firmly that we >>> require >>> > an >>> > > > iCLA, so this will simply state more clearly how we work with PRs. >>> > > > >>> > > > >>> > > > @purplecabbage >>> > > > risingj.com >>> > > > >>> > > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 10:46 AM, Joe Bowser <bows...@gmail.com> >>> > wrote: >>> > > > >>> > > > > So, it's basically the same system that we have now. I still >>> think >>> > we >>> > > > > should get clear intent from the author, since that's more >>> useful and >>> > > > easy >>> > > > > than determining whether it's trivial. I mean, isn't sending a >>> PR >>> > > > through >>> > > > > GitHub already clear intent? >>> > > > > >>> > > > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 10:41 AM, Jesse <purplecabb...@gmail.com >>> > >>> > > wrote: >>> > > > > >>> > > > > > You decide per pr if you think it is trivial. >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > @purplecabbage >>> > > > > > risingj.com >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 10:36 AM, Joe Bowser < >>> bows...@gmail.com> >>> > > > wrote: >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > > > I'll agree to this, since I don't know what the definition of >>> > > trivial >>> > > > > is >>> > > > > > > w.r.t. Apache. >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > +1 >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 10:30 AM, Jesse < >>> purplecabb...@gmail.com >>> > > >>> > > > > wrote: >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > +1 >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > @purplecabbage >>> > > > > > > > risingj.com >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 10:27 AM, Shazron < >>> shaz...@gmail.com> >>> > > > wrote: >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > Bump. There can't be lazy consensus on this. Before I >>> > > potentially >>> > > > > > waste >>> > > > > > > > > time on drafting a proposal, trying to feel the >>> temperature >>> > on >>> > > > this >>> > > > > > > > change. >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 3:34 PM, Shazron < >>> shaz...@gmail.com> >>> > > > wrote: >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > It's up to us to decide, and right now we require the >>> iCLA >>> > > > except >>> > > > > > for >>> > > > > > > > > > trivial contributions. >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > I want to change this to a more relaxed requirement: >>> > > > > > > > > > 1. Non-committers do not require an iCLA (you need one >>> > anyway >>> > > > to >>> > > > > > get >>> > > > > > > an >>> > > > > > > > > > account, so that's really a non-issue) >>> > > > > > > > > > 2. Require a clear intent by the author to contribute >>> under >>> > > our >>> > > > > > > normal >>> > > > > > > > > > terms, for a non-trivial change >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > So some of you will be wondering, what does Apache say >>> > about >>> > > > > this? >>> > > > > > > > > > From: http://mail-archives.apache. >>> > org/mod_mbox/www-infrastru >>> > > > > > > > > > cture-dev/201112.mbox/%3CA603FFCE-623B-43E9-87F8- >>> > > > > > > 39baa51c7...@gbiv.com >>> > > > > > > > > %3E >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > Roy Fielding: >>> > > > > > > > > > "Yes, that opinion comes from me speaking as a board >>> member >>> > > and >>> > > > > > > > > > author of the Apache License, and has previously been >>> > cleared >>> > > > > > > > > > with Apache's legal team for a long ago discussion with >>> > > > > Incubator. >>> > > > > > > > > > We don't need a CLA on file to accept contributions >>> from >>> > > > > > > > non-committers. >>> > > > > > > > > > We just need a clear intent by the author to contribute >>> > under >>> > > > > > > > > > our normal terms." >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > Other opinions: http://apetro.ghost.io/apache- >>> > > > > contributors-no-cla/ >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > We need to change our Contribute page: >>> > > > > > > > > > http://cordova.apache.org/contribute/ >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > ... as well as any PR templates: >>> > > > > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/cordova-plugin-media/blob/ >>> > master/. >>> > > > > > > > > > github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > This declaration of intent, if posted on Github, will >>> be >>> > > > > reflected >>> > > > > > on >>> > > > > > > > > > dev@cordova.apache.org since Apache sends out an >>> email on >>> > > each >>> > > > > PR >>> > > > > > or >>> > > > > > > > > > comment to a PR, so we will be able to track it in our >>> > > > archives. >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > As usual it is always the committer's responsibility to >>> > make >>> > > > sure >>> > > > > > > that >>> > > > > > > > > all >>> > > > > > > > > > code they push to a repository is compliant with ASF >>> > > policies. >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > > >>> > > > > > > >>> > > > > > >>> > > > > >>> > > > >>> > > >>> > >>> >> >> >
