*Brian:*
totally agree: real bad-bad-bad "anti-pattern in ASF projects"
but ASF is merely 3 years behind the times, so - no big deal :-)
cheers,
Andrei
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: switch to github
From: Brian Topping <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Date: Fri 17 Aug 2012 06:42:37 PM CDT
> On Aug 18, 2012, at 2:11 AM, Jean-Baptiste Onofré <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> When you are not committer on a project, and you contribute a patch, you
>> have to explicitly grant your license to ASF. To do that, you just mention
>> it by checking "Grant ASF" when attaching the file to the Jira.
> Yes, i appreciate that, but I thought we were trying to clarify whether
> Github pulls were acceptable means of providing patches. It seems that they
> are not acceptable for non-committers, so the fact that there are pull
> requests obscures the fact that those pull requests are unusable and
> therefore not statistically relevant.
>
> Having said that, it would be good to concretely clarify that Github pulls
> are not acceptable for non-committers, avoiding any interpretation that
> Github is a means by which non-committers can provide value to the project.
> It's important because it is actually very difficult in my experience to get
> patches applied, which dissuades people from contributing and makes it appear
> that nobody is interested when there may in fact be many folks interested in
> contributing but find it too unproductive to do so. These misinterpretations
> are very damaging to a project since valuable contributions (however small or
> unimportant to one group) are never made, and folks of a mindset similar to
> the person who never contributed do not in turn ever start using the project
> because these features never made it in.
>
> This is very much an anti-pattern in ASF projects, but I've found it pretty
> common as well, so please don't interpret this as me calling out Karaf in
> particular.
>
> Brian
