Git commit as the patch source (was Re: helping out with the Web site)

[Guillaume Nodet <gn...@gmail.com>]

On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 16:15, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Wednesday 10 November 2010 9:59:11 am James Strachan wrote:
>> On 10 November 2010 14:51, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote:
>> >
>> > For most of the people on this list, it ISN'T a big deal.   We deal with
>> > svn and mvn every day.   For others, it could be.
>>
>> Given 99% of all our documentation and web content is developed by
>> committers or folks who are capable of editing text files and using
>> git/svn, I'd rather use a system that helps the 99% be more effective.
>>
>> Maybe you should just help out this one CXF person & show them how to
>> fork & commit to github (its very easy), then you can easily pull
>> their commits from there?
>
> Umm..  no.   Pulling branches from github is NOT, at this point, an acceptable
> way of getting content into an Apache product.   They would still need to
> create a patch and attach it to  JIRA with the "grant" checkbox checked.

Has this workflow been discussed on legal-discuss ?  I'm not sure I
see the real difference between checking the box and attaching a patch
and checking the box and pointing to the diff / commit.  The point is
to make sure the user actually knows he grants the IP.   Actually the
checkbox could be problematic as it apply to the whole issue, whereas
the user could only grant one attachment and not all the attachments.


> --
> Daniel Kulp
> dkulp@apache.org
> http://dankulp.com/blog
>



-- 
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com

Re: Git commit as the patch source (was Re: helping out with the Web site)

[Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org>]

On Wednesday 10 November 2010 2:07:48 pm Guillaume Nodet wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 16:15, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote:
> > On Wednesday 10 November 2010 9:59:11 am James Strachan wrote:
> >> On 10 November 2010 14:51, Daniel Kulp <dk...@apache.org> wrote:
> >> > For most of the people on this list, it ISN'T a big deal.   We deal
> >> > with svn and mvn every day.   For others, it could be.
> >> 
> >> Given 99% of all our documentation and web content is developed by
> >> committers or folks who are capable of editing text files and using
> >> git/svn, I'd rather use a system that helps the 99% be more effective.
> >> 
> >> Maybe you should just help out this one CXF person & show them how to
> >> fork & commit to github (its very easy), then you can easily pull
> >> their commits from there?
> > 
> > Umm..  no.   Pulling branches from github is NOT, at this point, an
> > acceptable way of getting content into an Apache product.   They would
> > still need to create a patch and attach it to  JIRA with the "grant"
> > checkbox checked.
> 
> Has this workflow been discussed on legal-discuss ?  I'm not sure I
> see the real difference between checking the box and attaching a patch
> and checking the box and pointing to the diff / commit.  The point is
> to make sure the user actually knows he grants the IP.   Actually the
> checkbox could be problematic as it apply to the whole issue, whereas
> the user could only grant one attachment and not all the attachments. 

No.  The checkbox is per attachment.  See:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CXF-3105
for example.

There WAS a discussion about this someplace (probably incubator) a few months 
ago.   The conclusion was that a small patch included in email (or attached to 
the email) was OK or via the grant box on the bug tracker.   There really 
wasn't another alternative.    Part of it was getting the patch "as is" onto 
Apache hardware/systems prior to being applied. 

Part of the issue with the "pull from github" approach is it cannot  be 
tracked long term.   If the github fork/repo is removed, the link to the 
original source is gone.    (although someone could technically delete the 
patches attached to the JIRA's as well, but that occurs far less often)


-- 
Daniel Kulp
dkulp@apache.org
http://dankulp.com/blog