On Aug 19, 2012, at 10:55 , Robert Niederreiter <r...@squarewave.at> wrote:
> btw - pyramid seem to have a very pragmatic approach for the signing process
An approach I doubt will hold up in a court of law. We require and have wet
signatures, which makes me feel a lot more "on the safe side".
> Either way - SVN or GIT - it is just a question IF merging code from a
> non-contributor is done BY a contributor, not HOW.
Done by a contributor with some clear gesture from the non-contributor that
code ownership is going into the hands of that contributor.
> For me the discussion sounds a little like a general denial against github
> using the legal story as rationale.
Speaking for myself as ZF representative, it is my duty to make sure that chain
of custody for the code is upheld and safeguarded. Convenience, which I feel is
driving the move towards GitHub, is nice to have. But I would not do my job if
I didn't make extra-sure that any move for Zope Foundation code did not fulfil
all legal requirements before spending much thought on convenience.
Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org
** No cross posts or HTML encoding! **
(Related lists -