I'd just try to be careful about introducing unnecessary friction for
small contributions. I've never contributed to the FSF or GNU despite
being a big fan of their philosophy due to the even more complicated
paperwork required to submit anything to them (copyright assignment).
On Wed, 3 Feb 2021
I wonder if we could give ourselves guidelines like:
- any change to an algorithm is not trivial (I know, i know, every line of
code can be considered an algorithm)
- any change created by a tool is trivial, like clean ups that remove
trailing whitespace, reflectors code and so on. The issue is th
It has more to do with copyright. Trivial changes aren't copyrightable
or can be trivially verified to be public domain or similar. Think
things like typos, one-liners, etc.
If you merge a PR from someone without an ICLA, basically, you're
taking the responsibility of saying "I verified this code
I guess the answer is, “You know it when you see it”. Usually it is pretty
obvious. I wouldn’t go solely by lines of code, but that could be a factor.
I think the way I would view it is if you look at the PR and can review it in a
couple of minutes and say to yourself, “Gee, that looks pretty
Would you briefly define *non-trivial changes*, please? I can imagine it
might be difficult to come up with a precise definition, though I would
like to hear one. Is it measured by LoC changes? If so, that is a pretty
objective criteria. Is it measured by the impact? If so, that is a pretty
subject
ICLAs are needed from people who contribute non-trivial changes and
haven't already filled one out. There's a list of names who already
submitted ICLAs on this page:
https://home.apache.org/unlistedclas.html
On Wed, 3 Feb 2021 at 08:17, Volkan Yazıcı wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Recently we have request
