Yeah, looks like moinmoin was case sensitive on my login. Pinged silkysun@who was up and she managed to fix it. I foolishly didn't follow instructions when I setup my login, I guess I'll need to find out how to fix that at some point.
On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 9:48 PM, Andrew Bayer <[email protected]>wrote: > I'm able to edit it, fwiw. > > A. > > On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 9:18 PM, Matt Stephenson <[email protected] > >wrote: > > > Ignasi, > > This page you created is immutable and I cannot edit it. Please make it > > writeable to admins. I would like to clean it up since you're not > > responding to my feedback. > > > > Matt > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Matt Stephenson <[email protected] > > >wrote: > > > > > Sigh, it's so irritating that we're always writing "Git 101" docs for > > > contributor/committer docs. > > > > > > Lets link to these instead, they're way more instructive : > > > https://help.github.com/articles/set-up-git > > > https://help.github.com/articles/fork-a-repo > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 3:25 PM, Matt Stephenson < > [email protected] > > >wrote: > > > > > >> Also, since we're Commit Then Review, committers don't follow the same > > >> process as contributors for making changes. > > >> > > >> > > >> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 3:23 PM, Matt Stephenson < > [email protected] > > >wrote: > > >> > > >>> I don't see how it's beneficial to the audience though, and if I'm > > >>> looking for that as a committer, I'd rather not scroll to the bottom. > > I'd > > >>> rather just search for committer guide or something, not > contributing. > > >>> > > >>> > > >>> On Tue, Jun 18, 2013 at 2:34 PM, Ignasi <[email protected] > > >wrote: > > >>> > > >>>> Thanks for reviewing Matt! > > >>>> > > >>>> Agree. Modified the text to only require the rebase but leave the > > >>>> squash as an optional step. > > >>>> > > >>>> Regarding the commiters stuff, I personally think it is good to have > > >>>> just one guide. Commiters specific steps are only at the very end of > > >>>> the document, and I see no point in having a separate document for > > >>>> them. I also like the idea of transparency, and I think it is good > > >>>> that people know how we are going to merge their contributions. > > >>>> Anyway, this is something we can discuss and take the preferred > option > > >>>> :) > > >>>> > > >>>> On 18 June 2013 17:03, Matt Stephenson <[email protected]> > wrote: > > >>>> > I wouldn't include that all commits need to be squashed, but agree > > >>>> with > > >>>> > rebasing to master. > > >>>> > On Jun 18, 2013 8:00 AM, "Matt Stephenson" <[email protected] > > > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > > >>>> >> I'd split the committer's section out to another page. If we > want > > >>>> a page > > >>>> >> that gets a contributor to the point of having a PR, then just do > > >>>> that. > > >>>> >> The rest is for another audience. > > >>>> >> On Jun 18, 2013 6:16 AM, "Ignasi" <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > >>>> >> > > >>>> >>> I understood that from an email thread where this was discussed. > > It > > >>>> >>> was opened in the private list so I can't paste the link here, > but > > >>>> >>> your recommendations were: > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> >>> "Oliver: As long as the contribution is attached to a jira I > > >>>> consider > > >>>> >>> implicit > > >>>> >>> the contributor agree on the Apache license for the code he > > provide. > > >>>> >>> Perso, when the patch/contribution is very huge (don't ask me > > >>>> figures > > >>>> >>> in term of lines of code :-) )." > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> >>> "David: As a general rule submissions to the project (mailing > > list, > > >>>> >>> Jira, pull request, etc.) are assumed under the terms of the ASL > > to > > >>>> be > > >>>> >>> offered under the same license unless explicitly stated > otherwise. > > >>>> >>> Major contributions might need a CLA, but most patches won't > rise > > to > > >>>> >>> this level in my experience." > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> >>> I understand then, that by default, there is no need to sign the > > >>>> CLA. > > >>>> >>> I'll remove that section from the guide :) > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> >>> Thanks for checking! > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> >>> On 18 June 2013 14:54, David Nalley <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>>> >>> >> == Contributor license agreement == > > >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >>> >> Before contributing, you may have to sign the [[ > > >>>> >>> http://www.apache.org/licenses/#clas|Apache ICLA]]. All > > >>>> contributions > > >>>> >>> and patches attached to a [[ > > >>>> >>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/JCLOUDS|JIRA]] issue are > > >>>> assumed > > >>>> >>> to be under the agreement, so even if small patches and changes > > may > > >>>> not > > >>>> >>> require an explicit signature, it is always a good idea to have > it > > >>>> in place. > > >>>> >>> >> > > >>>> >>> > > > >>>> >>> > A signed CLA isn't required by the ASF for patches - is there > a > > >>>> reason > > >>>> >>> > the project wishes to require them? > > >>>> >>> > > > >>>> >>> > --David > > >>>> >>> > > >>>> >> > > >>>> > > >>> > > >>> > > >> > > > > > >
