[email protected] said: > On Fri, Feb 3, 2012 at 2:03 PM, Martin Lucina <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Could the maintainers please revert pull request #225 on the basis that it > > does not fulfill the above requirement? > > Not done, instead we clarified the requirement.
To clarify; I wasn't referring to Github accounts, but to the Git commits themselves: commit 1e5a48f5217edf874d5771b29ceb7680a930d4b3 Refs: v3.1.0-6-g1e5a48f Author: m <[email protected]> AuthorDate: Fri Jan 27 15:24:47 2012 -0800 Commit: m <[email protected]> CommitDate: Fri Jan 27 15:24:47 2012 -0800 If this project ever has to endure a SCO-like attack, IMO it'll be very hard to defend with pseudonymous *commits*. There was a discussion about this on LKML some time ago; IIRC the resolution was "no pseudonymous commits", and it *may* have later been revised as "unless you can convince a gatekeeper that you have a very good reason for not using your real name". > > Also, I would like to propose that the following points are added to the > > contribution policy: > > Done, thanks! Thanks! -mato _______________________________________________ zeromq-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
