CLA should not be needed for Pull Requests

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
4 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

CLA should not be needed for Pull Requests

Stian Soiland-Reyes
https://github.com/apache/commons-collections/blob/trunk/CONTRIBUTING.md#submitting-changes
says


> Sign the Contributor License Agreement if you haven't already.
> Push your changes to a topic branch in your fork of the repository.
> Submit a pull request to the repository in the apache organization.

However I don't think we should require a CLA for small patches - this
is not an ASF requirement as such patches would still be covered by
the Apache License. We should still require an ICLA for new additions
and anything that looks "large" or "clever".

This was mentioned in http://apetro.ghost.io/apache-contributors-no-cla/
and
https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/d29ad962938540f2f2b5cc70e7f0b3d3ec347fc5c619a6498a141fdc@%3Clegal-discuss.apache.org%3E


Am I OK to update that README to clarify that ICLA is not always
needed, or do we have such a policy of always requiring ICLA within
Apache Commons?


We should also update https://commons.apache.org/patches.html
to describe Pull Requests and ICLAs.


--
Stian Soiland-Reyes
Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CLA should not be needed for Pull Requests

Stian Soiland-Reyes
Suggested text:

> Sign and submit the Apache Contributor License Agreement if you haven't already. Note that small patches & bug-fixes do not require a CLA as they are covered by Apache License clause 5.


On 29 June 2016 at 16:59, Stian Soiland-Reyes <[hidden email]> wrote:

> https://github.com/apache/commons-collections/blob/trunk/CONTRIBUTING.md#submitting-changes
> says
>
>
>> Sign the Contributor License Agreement if you haven't already.
>> Push your changes to a topic branch in your fork of the repository.
>> Submit a pull request to the repository in the apache organization.
>
> However I don't think we should require a CLA for small patches - this
> is not an ASF requirement as such patches would still be covered by
> the Apache License. We should still require an ICLA for new additions
> and anything that looks "large" or "clever".
>
> This was mentioned in http://apetro.ghost.io/apache-contributors-no-cla/
> and
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/d29ad962938540f2f2b5cc70e7f0b3d3ec347fc5c619a6498a141fdc@%3Clegal-discuss.apache.org%3E
>
>
> Am I OK to update that README to clarify that ICLA is not always
> needed, or do we have such a policy of always requiring ICLA within
> Apache Commons?
>
>
> We should also update https://commons.apache.org/patches.html
> to describe Pull Requests and ICLAs.
>
>
> --
> Stian Soiland-Reyes
> Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons
> http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718



--
Stian Soiland-Reyes
Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CLA should not be needed for Pull Requests

garydgregory
Maybe better:

"Note that small patches & bug fixes do not require a CLA as clause 5 of
the Apache License covers them."

(also bug fix is not hyphenated).

Gary

On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 9:10 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <[hidden email]>
wrote:

> Suggested text:
>
> > Sign and submit the Apache Contributor License Agreement if you haven't
> already. Note that small patches & bug-fixes do not require a CLA as they
> are covered by Apache License clause 5.
>
>
> On 29 June 2016 at 16:59, Stian Soiland-Reyes <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> https://github.com/apache/commons-collections/blob/trunk/CONTRIBUTING.md#submitting-changes
> > says
> >
> >
> >> Sign the Contributor License Agreement if you haven't already.
> >> Push your changes to a topic branch in your fork of the repository.
> >> Submit a pull request to the repository in the apache organization.
> >
> > However I don't think we should require a CLA for small patches - this
> > is not an ASF requirement as such patches would still be covered by
> > the Apache License. We should still require an ICLA for new additions
> > and anything that looks "large" or "clever".
> >
> > This was mentioned in http://apetro.ghost.io/apache-contributors-no-cla/
> > and
> >
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/d29ad962938540f2f2b5cc70e7f0b3d3ec347fc5c619a6498a141fdc@%3Clegal-discuss.apache.org%3E
> >
> >
> > Am I OK to update that README to clarify that ICLA is not always
> > needed, or do we have such a policy of always requiring ICLA within
> > Apache Commons?
> >
> >
> > We should also update https://commons.apache.org/patches.html
> > to describe Pull Requests and ICLAs.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Stian Soiland-Reyes
> > Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons
> > http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
>
>
>
> --
> Stian Soiland-Reyes
> Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons
> http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>
>


--
E-Mail: [hidden email] | [hidden email]
Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
<http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
Home: http://garygregory.com/
Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CLA should not be needed for Pull Requests

Stian Soiland-Reyes
Great - fixes added to commons-build-plugin

https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/commons/proper/commons-build-plugin/trunk/src/main/resources/commons-xdoc-templates/



and applied on

https://github.com/apache/commons-crypto/blob/master/README.md
https://github.com/apache/commons-crypto/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md

(and once SVN updates, also in https://github.com/apache/commons-collections/ )


I also fixed the IRC channel, which said #apachecommons but it should
be #apache-commons, as well as some other smaller modifications and
suggestions.



BTW, the Travis-CI badges etc. on top of commons-crypto README.md
disappears if I do mvn commons:readme-md ..

On 29 June 2016 at 17:39, Gary Gregory <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Maybe better:
>
> "Note that small patches & bug fixes do not require a CLA as clause 5 of
> the Apache License covers them."
>
> (also bug fix is not hyphenated).
>
> Gary
>
> On Wed, Jun 29, 2016 at 9:10 AM, Stian Soiland-Reyes <[hidden email]>
> wrote:
>
>> Suggested text:
>>
>> > Sign and submit the Apache Contributor License Agreement if you haven't
>> already. Note that small patches & bug-fixes do not require a CLA as they
>> are covered by Apache License clause 5.
>>
>>
>> On 29 June 2016 at 16:59, Stian Soiland-Reyes <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> >
>> https://github.com/apache/commons-collections/blob/trunk/CONTRIBUTING.md#submitting-changes
>> > says
>> >
>> >
>> >> Sign the Contributor License Agreement if you haven't already.
>> >> Push your changes to a topic branch in your fork of the repository.
>> >> Submit a pull request to the repository in the apache organization.
>> >
>> > However I don't think we should require a CLA for small patches - this
>> > is not an ASF requirement as such patches would still be covered by
>> > the Apache License. We should still require an ICLA for new additions
>> > and anything that looks "large" or "clever".
>> >
>> > This was mentioned in http://apetro.ghost.io/apache-contributors-no-cla/
>> > and
>> >
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/d29ad962938540f2f2b5cc70e7f0b3d3ec347fc5c619a6498a141fdc@%3Clegal-discuss.apache.org%3E
>> >
>> >
>> > Am I OK to update that README to clarify that ICLA is not always
>> > needed, or do we have such a policy of always requiring ICLA within
>> > Apache Commons?
>> >
>> >
>> > We should also update https://commons.apache.org/patches.html
>> > to describe Pull Requests and ICLAs.
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Stian Soiland-Reyes
>> > Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons
>> > http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Stian Soiland-Reyes
>> Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons
>> http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> E-Mail: [hidden email] | [hidden email]
> Java Persistence with Hibernate, Second Edition
> <http://www.manning.com/bauer3/>
> JUnit in Action, Second Edition <http://www.manning.com/tahchiev/>
> Spring Batch in Action <http://www.manning.com/templier/>
> Blog: http://garygregory.wordpress.com
> Home: http://garygregory.com/
> Tweet! http://twitter.com/GaryGregory



--
Stian Soiland-Reyes
Apache Taverna (incubating), Apache Commons
http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9842-9718

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]