Re: [DISCUSS] Not requiring an iCLA for contributions

[Shazron <sh...@gmail.com>]

Pulling this in (docs) plus the 23 PRs for all the plugins.

On Wed, Sep 28, 2016 at 12:59 AM, Shazron <sh...@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 <sh...@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 <st...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1
>>>
>>> On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 11:09 AM, Simon MacDonald <
>>> simon.macdonald@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 <sh...@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 <pu...@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 <bo...@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 <purplecabbage@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 <
>>> bowserj@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 <
>>> purplecabbage@gmail.com
>>> > >
>>> > > > > wrote:
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > +1
>>> > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > @purplecabbage
>>> > > > > > > > risingj.com
>>> > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 10:27 AM, Shazron <
>>> shazron@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 <
>>> shazron@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-
>>> > > > > > > 39BAA51C72D1@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.
>>> > > > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > > >
>>> > > > > > >
>>> > > > > >
>>> > > > >
>>> > > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>
>>
>