Contribution policy

[Brian Guthrie-2]

Hi all,

Had a chat with TW legal. We still need to keep the contributor's
agreement, unfortunately, but luckily it's just email these days,
which isn't so bad.

The contribution policy, though, is apparently something we came up
with. Right now it involves users submitting Git-formatted patches
through Lighthouse. Agree that contributions should have an associated
Lighthouse ticket but is there any reason why we can't honor Github
pull requests directly by linking a the ticket to the changeset of the
merge, such as it is? That seems like it'd be easier than making
people go through the process of generating a patch, although I
suppose it might make it easier to judge the quality of the
contributions.

Brian
_______________________________________________
Cruisecontrolrb-developers mailing list
Cruisecontrolrb-developers@...
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/cruisecontrolrb-developers

[Chad Woolley]

On Sat, Jul 4, 2009 at 12:02 PM, Brian Guthrie<btguthrie@...> wrote:
> is there any reason why we can't honor Github
> pull requests directly by linking a the ticket to the changeset of the
> merge, such as it is?

Here's some I can think of (let me know if I'm wrong on any)

* git-formatted patches preserve the original author as well as the committer.
* patches are also less work for the committer (don't have to do the
work of figuring out the revision and merging)
* Patches remain even if the person deletes their repo/branch off github
* Patches provide more focus if the changeset no longer applies cleanly
* Everything is public and consolidated for comment and competing
patches (only account admins can see and reply to pull requests)

-- Chad
_______________________________________________
Cruisecontrolrb-developers mailing list
Cruisecontrolrb-developers@...
http://rubyforge.org/mailman/listinfo/cruisecontrolrb-developers