The pull request email from GitHub going to the dev list is sufficient, so far as I know.
A. On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:35 PM, Matt Stephenson <[email protected]>wrote: > Does the record of the patch need to exist somewhere in the ASF > infrastructure? I'm assuming that pointing back to github as a reference > is insufficient. > > > On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 2:31 PM, David Nalley <[email protected]> wrote: > > > On Mon, Jun 24, 2013 at 5:22 PM, Andrew Phillips <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > >>> really well for me. Is there a particular reason to use patches? Is > > this > > >>> just a matter of personal preference? > > >> > > >> > > >> Just because it is what I used :) I see it a bit easier and also > > generates > > >> the patch for the Jira issue, so I think it could be a good way to > > >> proceed. > > >> Does anyone have any preference? > > > > > > > > > I thought there was a requirement that the code change be attached to > the > > > relevant JIRA issue as a patch. Unless that requirement is not > applicable > > > (@mentors: ?), we will still at least need to *generate* the patch and > > > attach it to the JIRA issue if one exists. Thankfully GitHub's > > > <pr-href>.patch URL makes that easy. > > > > > > > There is no such requirement. It must be clear that the patch is > > submitted to the project, and there must be a record of that to deal > > with long term provenance questions. > > This means that it could be: > > * submitted to the mailing list > > * submitted as a PR (provided the mailing list received the PR > > notification) > > * submitted as a patch in Jira > > >
