Access to the Python results is currently down, but has anyone
actually accessed the Coverity scan results any time recently? Or who
even has access anymore?
Please commit any PEP changes to hg.python.org/peps.
Also, sorry for the span on -checkins, I should not have enabled
the notification hook before pushing all changes :)
Georg
Yes, I can. Thanks, Pat
regards
Steve
On Mar 16, 2011, at 12:04 PM, Pat Campbell wrote:
> Hi Steve:
>
> Are you able to read the attached spreadsheet?
> Thanks,
> Pat
>
>
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 11:44 AM, Steve Holden <steve(a)holdenweb.com> wrote:
> Pat:
>
> It appears that our contributor agreement records are not complete. Do you have a list of people for whom we hold a signed agreement, please?
>
> regards
> Steve
>
> On Mar 16, 2011, at 11:05 AM, Barry Warsaw wrote:
>
> > On Mar 16, 2011, at 06:14 AM, Steve Holden wrote:
> >
> >> Time it did, then. Anything the Foundation can do to help?
> >
> > How about posting a list of people for which you have verified contributor
> > forms on record? I'm in the same boat as Fred. I'm nearly certain I signed a
> > contributor form way back when, but I also heard some got lost. If I need to
> > sign another one, I'm happy (and legally able) to.
> >
> > -Barry
> > _______________________________________________
> > python-committers mailing list
> > python-committers(a)python.org
> > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
>
>
>
>
> --
> Pat Campbell
> PSF Administrator/Secretary
> patcam(a)python.org
> <ContributorAgreements-'-09, '10, & '11.xls>
I added a boolean flag to the bug tracker indicating what user accounts
belong to committers. Please check that the flag is set in Your Details,
Is Committer. If it's not, please let me know.
Regards,
Martin
What is the process now? Is it a showstopper?
-------- Message transféré --------
De: Pat Campbell <patcam(a)python.org>
À: Antoine Pitrou <solipsis(a)pitrou.net>
Cc: Steve Holden <steve(a)holdenweb.com>
Sujet: Re: [python-committers] Push rights for Ross Lagerwall
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 11:54:29 -0500
Hi All:
I have not received a contributor agreement for Ross Lagerwall yet. It
maybe
in transit at this point. However, if the need arises another can be
sent
directly to me at:
PSF
c/o Pat Campbell
6306 Treetop Circle
Tampa, Florida 33617
Thanks,
Pat
On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 11:12 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis(a)pitrou.net>
wrote:
Absolutely no idea. Either very recently, or earlier.
Le mardi 08 mars 2011 à 11:07 -0500, Pat Campbell a écrit :
> Hi All:
>
> When should it have come in?
>
> Thanks,
> Pat
>
>
> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Steve Holden
<steve(a)holdenweb.com>
> wrote:
> Pat should know if we have received one.
>
> regards
> Steve
>
>
> On Mar 8, 2011, at 9:19 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>
> > Le mardi 08 mars 2011 à 00:57 -0800, Raymond
Hettinger a
> écrit :
> >
> >>
> >> Do we have a signed contributor agreement?
> >
> > I've told Ross it would be nice to send one if he
hadn't
> already done
> > so, but I have obviously no way of checking whether
he did
> or not.
> >
> > Regards
> >
> > Antoine.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > python-committers mailing list
> > python-committers(a)python.org
> >
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
>
>
>
>
> --
> Pat Campbell
> PSF Administrator/Secretary
> patcam(a)python.org
--
Pat Campbell
PSF Administrator/Secretary
patcam(a)python.org
Antoine Pitrou ha scritto:
> Hello,
>
> Ross Logerwall has been contributing patches for several months (both
>bug fixes and new features). 28 changesets bear his name. I would like
> to propose him as a committer (is this still the appropriate word?).
>
> Regards
>
> Antoine.
+1 from me as well.
http://bugs.python.org/issue10812 and others such as sendfile()
addition are some valuable pieces of work.
--- Giampaolo
http://code.google.com/p/pyftpdlib/http://code.google.com/p/psutil/
Thanks to Kelsey Hightower, we now have a hook that notifies Roundup
of commit messages that reference issues.
*** To make this work, you need to use a hg user name in the form
*** "User Name <email@address>" AND make sure Roundup knows of this
*** email address. To check this, go to "Your Details" in Roundup
*** and make sure the address is either in "E-mail address" or in
*** "Alternate E-mail addresses".
Then if you put "#12345", "issue 12345" or "issue12345" in a commit
message, this commit message will be added as a comment on the
Roundup issue with a link to the changeset when it is pushed to the
central repo.
If you prefix this with one of "close", "closing", "closed", "closes"
(or the same verb forms of "fix"), the issue will also be closed
automatically.
Please let us know of any bugs you encounter.
Georg
On Mar 6, 2011, at 2:33 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>
>>> Le dimanche 06 mars 2011 à 13:19 -0500, Steve Holden a écrit :
>>>> In short, if someone isn't able to sign a contributor agreement we
>>>> should ask ourselves whether it's really appropriate to incorporate
>>>> their contributions into the code base.
>>>
>>> What do you mean with "isn't able"? Surely everyone is physically and
>>> technically able to do so :)
>>> Now, if someone (such as Anatoly) actively *refuses* to sign an
>>> agreement when asked to, I agree they might not be reliable. But I don't
>>> think that's the case we're talking about.
>>
>> I meant "isn't able" in the sense that the would-be contributor
>> doesn't have rights in the code they seek to contribute.
>
> Ok, but how do you know that, if they still sign an agreement?
There isn't much we can do about people willfully lying to us. This does not relieve us of the obligation to try and ensure that contributions are covered by a contributor agreement.
>
>>>> If you make checkins of other people's code you should be as certain
>>>> as you can that you have the right to include it - since your
>>>> contributor agreement states that you assign to the PSF the right to
>>>> relicense your contributions.
>>>
>>> I don't understand your reasoning. When I check in someone else's work,
>>> the author of the checkin is mostly someone else (I guess under the hood
>>> it may be more complicated, in French law it might be called a
>>> "composite work" or a "collective work", but let's try to ignore that).
>>> So *my* contributor agreement can't apply to the checkin since it is
>>> only valid for my own contributions.
>>
>> We'll need to get advice on this: if you are adding the code to the
>> code base then it is surely covered by your contributor agreement
>> (assuming you are adding the "this code provided under a contributor
>> agreement" notice as requested in the developer notes). If you aren't,
>> then shouldn't you be?
>
> Sorry, I don't understand your question: shouldn't I be what?
>
Shouldn't you be adding the notice?
> As for the "this code provided under a contributor agreement" notice, I
> haven't seen it added in a long time (neither by me nor by anyone else).
> I'm not convinced it should pollute our commit messages and/or our code
> files (since it would end up basically anywhere, or at least that's the
> desired effect).
>
>> If you aren't happy that you have the rights to do that then I don't
>> believe you should be checking in those contributions because they may
>> threaten to encumber code we are licensing to third parties.
>
> I'm not unhappy with it. I'm simply quite sure that an agreement I have
> signed cannot be forced on a third-party (the submitter and main author
> of the checked in code) who hasn't signed it. Legally, I mean.
>
>>>> Wouldn't it be easier and more straightforward to have these people
>>>> sign contributor agreements even if you continue to check in their
>>>> code?
>>>
>>> Well, between mandating the signature of an agreement, and not mandating
>>> said signature, I think the easiest and most straightforward (both for
>>> them - who have to sign it -, for us - who have to check that an
>>> agreement exists -, and for the PSF - who has to gather and record said
>>> agreements) is the latter. All other things being equal, that is.
>>
>> "The latter" meaning requiring contributor agreements? I hope so, but
>> language is rarely as clear as we would wish.
>
> No, "the latter" meant "not mandating said signature".
OK. As far as I am concerned, adding code to the repository that is not covered by a contributor agreement is a recipe for disaster, and I would like to hear what other committers think. I'm not sure how or when the committers list was dropped from our conversation, but I hope you don't mind me adding it back for that purpose.
regards
Steve
Hello,
Ross Logerwall has been contributing patches for several months (both
bug fixes and new features). 28 changesets bear his name. I would like
to propose him as a committer (is this still the appropriate word?).
Regards
Antoine.
