Re: svn commit: r821452 - /httpd/mod_fcgid/trunk/modules/fcgid/fcgid_pm_unix.c
On Sat, Oct 3, 2009 at 8:29 PM, fua...@apache.org wrote: Author: fuankg Date: Sun Oct 4 00:29:02 2009 New Revision: 821452 URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=821452view=rev Log: fixed log type prefix. you mentioned in another thread that somebody sent this to you; in that case the commit log should show Submitted by: xxx yyy xxx zzz.com Reviewed by: (you)
Re: svn commit: r821452 - /httpd/mod_fcgid/trunk/modules/fcgid/fcgid_pm_unix.c
Hi, Jeff Trawick schrieb: you mentioned in another thread that somebody sent this to you; in that case the commit log should show Submitted by: xxx yyy xxx zzz.com http://zzz.com Reviewed by: (you) I know, I know; but my friend always prefers to stay anonymous, and wants to get me blamed for everything :) (just asked him again) Gün.
Re: svn commit: r821452 - /httpd/mod_fcgid/trunk/modules/fcgid/fcgid_pm_unix.c
Guenter Knauf wrote: Hi, Jeff Trawick schrieb: you mentioned in another thread that somebody sent this to you; in that case the commit log should show Submitted by: xxx yyy xxx zzz.com http://zzz.com Reviewed by: (you) I know, I know; but my friend always prefers to stay anonymous, and wants to get me blamed for everything :) (just asked him again) If your anonymous friend does not have a CLA on file, you must revert; that is a condition you accepted, signing your own CLA.
Re: svn commit: r821452 - /httpd/mod_fcgid/trunk/modules/fcgid/fcgid_pm_unix.c
Hi, William A. Rowe, Jr. schrieb: If your anonymous friend does not have a CLA on file, you must revert; that is a condition you accepted, signing your own CLA. huh? and this condition changes if I write his name and email address into logs? Gün.
Re: svn commit: r821452 - /httpd/mod_fcgid/trunk/modules/fcgid/fcgid_pm_unix.c
On Sun, Oct 4, 2009 at 6:23 PM, Guenter Knauf fua...@apache.org wrote: Hi, William A. Rowe, Jr. schrieb: If your anonymous friend does not have a CLA on file, you must revert; that is a condition you accepted, signing your own CLA. huh? and this condition changes if I write his name and email address into logs? He's referring to #7 in http://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt
Re: svn commit: r821452 - /httpd/mod_fcgid/trunk/modules/fcgid/fcgid_pm_unix.c
On Oct 4, 2009, at 2:57 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Guenter Knauf wrote: Hi, Jeff Trawick schrieb: you mentioned in another thread that somebody sent this to you; in that case the commit log should show Submitted by: xxx yyy xxx zzz.com http://zzz.com Reviewed by: (you) I know, I know; but my friend always prefers to stay anonymous, and wants to get me blamed for everything :) (just asked him again) If your anonymous friend does not have a CLA on file, you must revert; that is a condition you accepted, signing your own CLA. Note that this only applies to copyrightable submissions. IIRC, repairs are not copyrightable unless they introduce something substantially new. Roy
Re: svn commit: r821452 - /httpd/mod_fcgid/trunk/modules/fcgid/fcgid_pm_unix.c
Roy T. Fielding wrote: On Oct 4, 2009, at 2:57 PM, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote: Guenter Knauf wrote: Hi, Jeff Trawick schrieb: you mentioned in another thread that somebody sent this to you; in that case the commit log should show Submitted by: xxx yyy xxx zzz.com http://zzz.com Reviewed by: (you) I know, I know; but my friend always prefers to stay anonymous, and wants to get me blamed for everything :) (just asked him again) If your anonymous friend does not have a CLA on file, you must revert; that is a condition you accepted, signing your own CLA. Note that this only applies to copyrightable submissions. IIRC, repairs are not copyrightable unless they introduce something substantially new. Correct, r821452 really needs no attribution at all if it isn't desired. But since his comment, my friend always prefers to stay anonymous implied more than this single patch, it seems appropriate to call out the general concern.
Re: svn commit: r821452 - /httpd/mod_fcgid/trunk/modules/fcgid/fcgid_pm_unix.c
William A. Rowe, Jr. schrieb: But since his comment, my friend always prefers to stay anonymous implied more than this single patch, it seems appropriate to call out the general concern. you got this wrong - I meant that he prefers so at all other places too, and not that he sends me tons of patches which I commit without crediting him. Also I would expect that someone who wants to be credited, and wants to hold copyrights on his/her submission certainly would self subscribe on the list, and submit self to the list. My friend was long enough here subscribed on the list, and posted patches, and got credited; thus it happened too often to him that he got ignored (which is a general prob which happens to many others too), and finally it was not worth for him to deal with the huge amount of spam you get as a list subscriber (yeah, not everyone has a superdooper mail filter) only for being ignored (remember I write here his opinion), and so he unsubscribed, and some time later he anyway changed provider, and is now happy without spam - so has no fun to start the spam game again. Therefore I respect his desire to stay anonymous - which means more that he dislikes to subscribe to lists, or have his mail address otherwise appear on the inet; he's not anonymous to me. Quote from him just when I told him about our discussion here: well submit by yourself as needed to compile or leave out and have the * author fix when report a compiler error Gün.
Re: svn commit: r821452 - /httpd/mod_fcgid/trunk/modules/fcgid/fcgid_pm_unix.c
Guenter Knauf wrote: William A. Rowe, Jr. schrieb: But since his comment, my friend always prefers to stay anonymous implied more than this single patch, it seems appropriate to call out the general concern. you got this wrong - I meant that he prefers so at all other places too, and not that he sends me tons of patches which I commit without crediting him. Also I would expect that someone who wants to be credited, and wants to hold copyrights on his/her submission certainly would self subscribe on the list, and submit self to the list. Of course. I didn't mean to imply anything else, except to remind all committers of their responsibilities w.r.t. the iCLA. Roy is correct, that if he fixes a trivial typo, there is absolutely no need for an iCLA, or even for you to post credit where credit isn't desired. My friend was long enough here subscribed on the list, and posted patches, and got credited; thus it happened too often to him that he got ignored (which is a general prob which happens to many others too), and finally it was not worth for him to deal with the huge amount of spam you get as a list subscriber (yeah, not everyone has a superdooper mail filter) only for being ignored (remember I write here his opinion), and so he unsubscribed, and some time later he anyway changed provider, and is now happy without spam - so has no fun to start the spam game again. Therefore I respect his desire to stay anonymous - which means more that he dislikes to subscribe to lists, or have his mail address otherwise appear on the inet; he's not anonymous to me. That shouldn't be an issue though if you attribute him with our regular convention of Joe Smith jsmith foo.bar since we drop the @ deliberately and require a human to parse out what we meant. Trust me, there is no human between the email address harvesting and the spam crops. Quote from him just when I told him about our discussion here: well submit by yourself as needed to compile or leave out and have the * author fix when report a compiler error And a trivial fix emailed from anonym...@nowhere would also be accepted if posted (and by chance moderated) to the list. Thanks for intermediating these, just pay attention to the attribution requirements when a patch gets larger than a trivial fix :) Bill
