R. David Murray wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 09:40:44 +0100, "M.-A. Lemburg" wrote:
>> The second one is the one we currently use. It does not
>> have the clause to cover past contributions, since we now
>> expect contributors to sign the CLA before the contributions
>> go into the repository.
>
On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 09:40:44 +0100, "M.-A. Lemburg" wrote:
> The second one is the one we currently use. It does not
> have the clause to cover past contributions, since we now
> expect contributors to sign the CLA before the contributions
> go into the repository.
Note that this rarely happens i
Terry Reedy wrote:
>
>
> On 3/23/2011 9:31 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
>> http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/contrib-form-python/
>> and
>> http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/contrib-form/
>>
>> It looks like the first one is old, because
>> http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/ points to the second one
We should ask the pydotorg list to fix this. Should we at the same time requet
the assition of a field for the committer's user name?
regards
Steve
On Mar 23, 2011, at 10:41 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:
>
>
> On 3/23/2011 9:31 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
>> http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/contrib-
On 3/23/2011 9:31 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/contrib-form-python/
and
http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/contrib-form/
It looks like the first one is old, because
http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/ points to the second one.
I believe you are right. The only di
