@4) no need for that; once you're through the review process the apply happens within 24 hours (different time/work zones :-)). BTW, your pull request is almost through the pipe. Just waiting for two minor corrections and a new patch at the jira issue to get it in :-)
Kind regards, Andreas On Sat, Aug 18, 2012 at 2:33 AM, Andrei Pozolotin <[email protected]> wrote: > no, I have improvement on that git.html: > > 1) do all your work on github mirror via fork/pull > > 2) discuss your github pulls on ASF jira > > 3) when jira is accepted, do the "git format-patch origin/trunk" > and attach patch.txt to the jira with ASF grant check box > > 4) now pray to your favorite ASF committer to really accept the patch > > :-) > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: switch to github > From: Johan Edstrom <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Date: Fri 17 Aug 2012 06:52:45 PM CDT > > It is really clear. > http://www.apache.org/dev/git.html > > > On Aug 17, 2012, at 5:42 PM, Brian Topping <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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 > >
