Robert Pluim writes:
>> On Sat, 01 Feb 2020 15:34:54 +0100, Bastien said:
> Bastien> And since is it a good outcome to have more people signing the
> FSF
> Bastien> papers, I recommend requesting contributors to sign the copyright
> Bastien> assignment for every >15 lines contri
> On Sat, 01 Feb 2020 15:34:54 +0100, Bastien said:
Bastien> And since is it a good outcome to have more people signing the FSF
Bastien> papers, I recommend requesting contributors to sign the copyright
Bastien> assignment for every >15 lines contributions (significant or not).
No
Hi Dan,
Dan Drake writes:
> I'm willing to assign copyright to the FSF, make my
> contribution public domain, or whatever is most convenient and
> easiest to get this into org.
Thanks! My understanding is that your contribution has already been
added to org-mode, which is fine.
To assign your
I just wanted to add that I have no real opinion one way or the other on
the TINYCHANGE bit; I was just following what I found at
https://orgmode.org/worg/org-contribute.html.
I also have no strong opinion on how copyright should be handled for this.
I'm willing to assign copyright to the FSF, mak
Bastien writes:
> Future maintainers may of course interpret the recommendations of
> the FSF differently, but that's mine for now.
Of course, sir.
Hi Nicolas,
Nicolas Goaziou writes:
> Bastien writes:
>
>> My point is that distinguishing trivial vs. non-trivial parts of a
>> change may be subject to interpretation. When in doubt, I recommend
>> staying on the safe side of not accepting a change that is more than
>> 15 lines of "maybe-sig
Bastien writes:
> My point is that distinguishing trivial vs. non-trivial parts of a
> change may be subject to interpretation. When in doubt, I recommend
> staying on the safe side of not accepting a change that is more than
> 15 lines of "maybe-significant" changes.
AFACT, there was no doubt
Hi Nicolas,
I think it is worth spending a little time discussing this to ensure
that everyone is aligned on the same understanding, otherwise we may
have to spend more time later, discussing it over and over for other
cases.
Nicolas Goaziou writes:
> So, I stand on my ground: there is a "non-t
Hello,
Bastien writes:
> Nicolas Goaziou writes:
>
>> TINYCHANGE is only about the number of non-trivial lines of code in
>> your patch (15 or so).
>
> I would not say "non-trivial lines" of code.
>
> The change should be less *than 15 lines or so* to be accepted.
>
> I may be wrong, but this i
Hi Dan and Nicolas,
Nicolas Goaziou writes:
> TINYCHANGE is only about the number of non-trivial lines of code in
> your patch (15 or so).
I would not say "non-trivial lines" of code.
The change should be less *than 15 lines or so* to be accepted.
I may be wrong, but this is how I read this:
Hello,
Dan Drake writes:
> Thank you, Nicolas, for the review of my first patch. I've updated my code
> and have the new patch attached.
Thank you!
> I didn't inline the "time to minutes to keep function"; yes, that function
> is very short, but the function name makes the intent/purpose of th
Thank you, Nicolas, for the review of my first patch. I've updated my code
and have the new patch attached.
I didn't inline the "time to minutes to keep function"; yes, that function
is very short, but the function name makes the intent/purpose of the code
obvious, and the org-clock-resolve a bit
Hello,
Dan Drake writes:
> I asked about a way to specify a time when using org-resolve-clock instead
> of a number of minutes:
>
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/2020-01/msg00010.html
>
> I've implemented this myself and a patch is attached. Comments welcome --
> my change wor
I asked about a way to specify a time when using org-resolve-clock instead
of a number of minutes:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/2020-01/msg00010.html
I've implemented this myself and a patch is attached. Comments welcome --
my change works, but I'm not sure about coding style,
14 matches
Mail list logo
