From g.brandl at gmx.net  Fri Mar  4 17:55:14 2011
From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl)
Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 17:55:14 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] SVN repository is now read-only
Message-ID: <ikr5je$er2$1@dough.gmane.org>

Antoine and me are starting the conversion now (it takes quite
a while to get the SVN repo and convert it, so we're doing it
overnight).

The majority of the work will be done tomorrow: pushing the new
repositories live, enabling and testing all integration into
python.org services and probably more work on the new devguide.

Please join us in #python-dev if you have questions.

cheers,
Georg


From solipsis at pitrou.net  Fri Mar  4 18:18:33 2011
From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou)
Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 18:18:33 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] SVN repository is now read-only
In-Reply-To: <ikr5je$er2$1@dough.gmane.org>
References: <ikr5je$er2$1@dough.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <1299259113.3721.2.camel@localhost.localdomain>


Since it was just asked on #python-dev:

The current "cpython" repository is still a test repository, you can do
your test commits against it; a new fresh repository will replace it
once the conversion is over (so any important commits should be deferred
until further announcement :-)).

(I'm saying "commits" and not only "pushes" because if you base your
commits on some of the test commits that were done in between, they will
not push properly into the new repository)

Regards

Antoine.


Le vendredi 04 mars 2011 ? 17:55 +0100, Georg Brandl a ?crit :
> Antoine and me are starting the conversion now (it takes quite
> a while to get the SVN repo and convert it, so we're doing it
> overnight).
> 
> The majority of the work will be done tomorrow: pushing the new
> repositories live, enabling and testing all integration into
> python.org services and probably more work on the new devguide.
> 
> Please join us in #python-dev if you have questions.
> 
> cheers,
> Georg
> 
> _______________________________________________
> python-committers mailing list
> python-committers at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
> 



From stefan at bytereef.org  Fri Mar  4 18:21:26 2011
From: stefan at bytereef.org (Stefan Krah)
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 18:21:26 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] SVN repository is now read-only
In-Reply-To: <ikr5je$er2$1@dough.gmane.org>
References: <ikr5je$er2$1@dough.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <20110304172126.GA26909@sleipnir.bytereef.org>

Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:
> Antoine and me are starting the conversion now (it takes quite
> a while to get the SVN repo and convert it, so we're doing it
> overnight).
> 
> The majority of the work will be done tomorrow: pushing the new
> repositories live, enabling and testing all integration into
> python.org services and probably more work on the new devguide.
> 
> Please join us in #python-dev if you have questions.

Would it interfere with your plans if I commit an svnmerge for
py3k-cdecimal? Or is this now impossible?


Thanks,

Stefan Krah


From martin at v.loewis.de  Fri Mar  4 18:37:30 2011
From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=)
Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 18:37:30 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] SVN repository is now read-only
In-Reply-To: <20110304172126.GA26909@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
References: <ikr5je$er2$1@dough.gmane.org>
	<20110304172126.GA26909@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
Message-ID: <4D71235A.8040909@v.loewis.de>

Am 04.03.2011 18:21, schrieb Stefan Krah:
> Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:
>> Antoine and me are starting the conversion now (it takes quite
>> a while to get the SVN repo and convert it, so we're doing it
>> overnight).
>>
>> The majority of the work will be done tomorrow: pushing the new
>> repositories live, enabling and testing all integration into
>> python.org services and probably more work on the new devguide.
>>
>> Please join us in #python-dev if you have questions.
> 
> Would it interfere with your plans if I commit an svnmerge for
> py3k-cdecimal? Or is this now impossible?

It's impossible now; the repository is read-only (IIUC)

Regards,
Martin

From g.brandl at gmx.net  Fri Mar  4 18:47:11 2011
From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl)
Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 18:47:11 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] SVN repository is now read-only
In-Reply-To: <20110304172126.GA26909@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
References: <ikr5je$er2$1@dough.gmane.org>
	<20110304172126.GA26909@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
Message-ID: <4D71259F.9030504@gmx.net>

On 04.03.2011 18:21, Stefan Krah wrote:
> Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:
>> Antoine and me are starting the conversion now (it takes quite
>> a while to get the SVN repo and convert it, so we're doing it
>> overnight).
>> 
>> The majority of the work will be done tomorrow: pushing the new
>> repositories live, enabling and testing all integration into
>> python.org services and probably more work on the new devguide.
>> 
>> Please join us in #python-dev if you have questions.
> 
> Would it interfere with your plans if I commit an svnmerge for
> py3k-cdecimal? Or is this now impossible?

It was impossible, but now I removed the block again.  Please do
your svnmerge thing quickly :)

Georg



From stefan at bytereef.org  Fri Mar  4 18:56:26 2011
From: stefan at bytereef.org (Stefan Krah)
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 18:56:26 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] SVN repository is now read-only
In-Reply-To: <4D71259F.9030504@gmx.net>
References: <ikr5je$er2$1@dough.gmane.org>
	<20110304172126.GA26909@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
	<4D71259F.9030504@gmx.net>
Message-ID: <20110304175626.GA27876@sleipnir.bytereef.org>

Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:
> On 04.03.2011 18:21, Stefan Krah wrote:
> > Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:
> >> Antoine and me are starting the conversion now (it takes quite
> >> a while to get the SVN repo and convert it, so we're doing it
> >> overnight).
> >> 
> >> The majority of the work will be done tomorrow: pushing the new
> >> repositories live, enabling and testing all integration into
> >> python.org services and probably more work on the new devguide.
> >> 
> >> Please join us in #python-dev if you have questions.
> > 
> > Would it interfere with your plans if I commit an svnmerge for
> > py3k-cdecimal? Or is this now impossible?
> 
> It was impossible, but now I removed the block again.  Please do
> your svnmerge thing quickly :)

Thanks! Done in r88752. Let the conversion begin. :)


Stefan Krah



From g.brandl at gmx.net  Fri Mar  4 19:10:41 2011
From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl)
Date: Fri, 04 Mar 2011 19:10:41 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] SVN repository is now read-only
In-Reply-To: <4D71235A.8040909@v.loewis.de>
References: <ikr5je$er2$1@dough.gmane.org>
	<20110304172126.GA26909@sleipnir.bytereef.org>
	<4D71235A.8040909@v.loewis.de>
Message-ID: <ikra12$a9d$1@dough.gmane.org>

On 04.03.2011 18:37, "Martin v. L?wis" wrote:
> Am 04.03.2011 18:21, schrieb Stefan Krah:
>> Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:
>>> Antoine and me are starting the conversion now (it takes quite
>>> a while to get the SVN repo and convert it, so we're doing it
>>> overnight).
>>>
>>> The majority of the work will be done tomorrow: pushing the new
>>> repositories live, enabling and testing all integration into
>>> python.org services and probably more work on the new devguide.
>>>
>>> Please join us in #python-dev if you have questions.
>> 
>> Would it interfere with your plans if I commit an svnmerge for
>> py3k-cdecimal? Or is this now impossible?
> 
> It's impossible now; the repository is read-only (IIUC)

It's actually not that bad since hgsubversion allows incremental
conversion.  So in theory SVN could remain open until the
conversion process has reached recent commits, but I'd rather not
have confusion whether a certain commit made it into hg or not.

Georg


From raymond.hettinger at gmail.com  Fri Mar  4 21:15:41 2011
From: raymond.hettinger at gmail.com (Raymond Hettinger)
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 12:15:41 -0800
Subject: [python-committers] SVN repository is now read-only
In-Reply-To: <ikr5je$er2$1@dough.gmane.org>
References: <ikr5je$er2$1@dough.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <260CFB9F-B127-4FB3-A15A-33AFD64781FB@gmail.com>


On Mar 4, 2011, at 8:55 AM, Georg Brandl wrote:

> Antoine and me are starting the conversion now (it takes quite
> a while to get the SVN repo and convert it, so we're doing it
> overnight).


Thanks for stepping up and getting this done.


Raymond


From guido at python.org  Fri Mar  4 21:21:39 2011
From: guido at python.org (Guido van Rossum)
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 12:21:39 -0800
Subject: [python-committers] SVN repository is now read-only
In-Reply-To: <260CFB9F-B127-4FB3-A15A-33AFD64781FB@gmail.com>
References: <ikr5je$er2$1@dough.gmane.org>
	<260CFB9F-B127-4FB3-A15A-33AFD64781FB@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinYeSYhkAsEMbKgyQOTzm67zxnEcYguDpQUSnQO@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:15 PM, Raymond Hettinger
<raymond.hettinger at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Mar 4, 2011, at 8:55 AM, Georg Brandl wrote:
>
>> Antoine and me are starting the conversion now (it takes quite
>> a while to get the SVN repo and convert it, so we're doing it
>> overnight).
>
> Thanks for stepping up and getting this done.

+1

-- 
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)

From steve at holdenweb.com  Fri Mar  4 21:34:44 2011
From: steve at holdenweb.com (Steve Holden)
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 12:34:44 -0800
Subject: [python-committers] SVN repository is now read-only
In-Reply-To: <260CFB9F-B127-4FB3-A15A-33AFD64781FB@gmail.com>
References: <ikr5je$er2$1@dough.gmane.org>
	<260CFB9F-B127-4FB3-A15A-33AFD64781FB@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <02F3F280-D900-4BD5-9720-82E7EA32BBCF@holdenweb.com>

On Mar 4, 2011, at 12:15 PM, Raymond Hettinger wrote:

> 
> On Mar 4, 2011, at 8:55 AM, Georg Brandl wrote:
> 
>> Antoine and me are starting the conversion now (it takes quite
>> a while to get the SVN repo and convert it, so we're doing it
>> overnight).
> 
> 
> Thanks for stepping up and getting this done.


+1

This is *long* overdue. Thanks, Georg.

regards
 Steve

From brett at python.org  Fri Mar  4 23:25:47 2011
From: brett at python.org (Brett Cannon)
Date: Fri, 4 Mar 2011 14:25:47 -0800
Subject: [python-committers] SVN repository is now read-only
In-Reply-To: <02F3F280-D900-4BD5-9720-82E7EA32BBCF@holdenweb.com>
References: <ikr5je$er2$1@dough.gmane.org>
	<260CFB9F-B127-4FB3-A15A-33AFD64781FB@gmail.com>
	<02F3F280-D900-4BD5-9720-82E7EA32BBCF@holdenweb.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTik85jdpjXmFz4syXBe+ZRzaj3Z8P1HjnfF97ZcT@mail.gmail.com>

On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:34, Steve Holden <steve at holdenweb.com> wrote:

> On Mar 4, 2011, at 12:15 PM, Raymond Hettinger wrote:
>
> >
> > On Mar 4, 2011, at 8:55 AM, Georg Brandl wrote:
> >
> >> Antoine and me are starting the conversion now (it takes quite
> >> a while to get the SVN repo and convert it, so we're doing it
> >> overnight).
> >
> >
> > Thanks for stepping up and getting this done.
>
>
> +1
>
> This is *long* overdue. Thanks, Georg.
>

And thanks to Antoine as well. And Dirkjan for starting it.

-Brett


>
> regards
>  Steve
> _______________________________________________
> python-committers mailing list
> python-committers at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20110304/b3d86f51/attachment.html>

From ncoghlan at gmail.com  Sat Mar  5 09:39:09 2011
From: ncoghlan at gmail.com (Nick Coghlan)
Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 18:39:09 +1000
Subject: [python-committers] SVN repository is now read-only
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTik85jdpjXmFz4syXBe+ZRzaj3Z8P1HjnfF97ZcT@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ikr5je$er2$1@dough.gmane.org>
	<260CFB9F-B127-4FB3-A15A-33AFD64781FB@gmail.com>
	<02F3F280-D900-4BD5-9720-82E7EA32BBCF@holdenweb.com>
	<AANLkTik85jdpjXmFz4syXBe+ZRzaj3Z8P1HjnfF97ZcT@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikgQLLVE_SEPb_LChT678VFvpyprwzdfaEDo8_M@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 8:25 AM, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:34, Steve Holden <steve at holdenweb.com> wrote:
>> This is *long* overdue. Thanks, Georg.
>
> And thanks to Antoine as well. And Dirkjan for starting it.

And Brett for starting us down this path oh so many moons ago :)

Now to make sure the laptop has hg installed and a clone set up before
I fly out next week...

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan?? |?? ncoghlan at gmail.com?? |?? Brisbane, Australia

From g.brandl at gmx.net  Sat Mar  5 09:56:44 2011
From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl)
Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2011 09:56:44 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] SVN repository is now read-only
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikgQLLVE_SEPb_LChT678VFvpyprwzdfaEDo8_M@mail.gmail.com>
References: <ikr5je$er2$1@dough.gmane.org>
	<260CFB9F-B127-4FB3-A15A-33AFD64781FB@gmail.com>
	<02F3F280-D900-4BD5-9720-82E7EA32BBCF@holdenweb.com>
	<AANLkTik85jdpjXmFz4syXBe+ZRzaj3Z8P1HjnfF97ZcT@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikgQLLVE_SEPb_LChT678VFvpyprwzdfaEDo8_M@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <ikstu9$mpm$1@dough.gmane.org>

On 05.03.2011 09:39, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 8:25 AM, Brett Cannon <brett at python.org> wrote:
>> On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 12:34, Steve Holden <steve at holdenweb.com> wrote:
>>> This is *long* overdue. Thanks, Georg.
>>
>> And thanks to Antoine as well. And Dirkjan for starting it.
> 
> And Brett for starting us down this path oh so many moons ago :)
> 
> Now to make sure the laptop has hg installed and a clone set up before
> I fly out next week...

You might not need to, thanks to Brett's Dev-in-a-box project...

Georg



From ncoghlan at gmail.com  Sat Mar  5 10:31:03 2011
From: ncoghlan at gmail.com (Nick Coghlan)
Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2011 19:31:03 +1000
Subject: [python-committers] SVN repository is now read-only
In-Reply-To: <ikstu9$mpm$1@dough.gmane.org>
References: <ikr5je$er2$1@dough.gmane.org>
	<260CFB9F-B127-4FB3-A15A-33AFD64781FB@gmail.com>
	<02F3F280-D900-4BD5-9720-82E7EA32BBCF@holdenweb.com>
	<AANLkTik85jdpjXmFz4syXBe+ZRzaj3Z8P1HjnfF97ZcT@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikgQLLVE_SEPb_LChT678VFvpyprwzdfaEDo8_M@mail.gmail.com>
	<ikstu9$mpm$1@dough.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTik2zCL1_zgwhCEL_ypsw9TKU4r03xqgRzKg=LU2@mail.gmail.com>

On Sat, Mar 5, 2011 at 6:56 PM, Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:
> You might not need to, thanks to Brett's Dev-in-a-box project...

True, but I need to dust off the laptop and get everything up to date
before I leave, anyway (I really don't use it much when I'm not
travelling). May as well set up a new clone while I'm at it.

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan?? |?? ncoghlan at gmail.com?? |?? Brisbane, Australia

From solipsis at pitrou.net  Sat Mar  5 15:18:42 2011
From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou)
Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2011 15:18:42 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] New repositories
Message-ID: <1299334722.3692.0.camel@localhost.localdomain>


Hello,

Creation of the final hg repositories on hg.python.org is under way, so
please no test commits anymore.

Thank you

Antoine.



From g.brandl at gmx.net  Sat Mar  5 15:20:38 2011
From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl)
Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2011 15:20:38 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] New repositories
In-Reply-To: <1299334722.3692.0.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1299334722.3692.0.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <iktgtl$9li$1@dough.gmane.org>

On 05.03.2011 15:18, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> 
> Hello,
> 
> Creation of the final hg repositories on hg.python.org is under way, so
> please no test commits anymore.

And since testing things out if you're new to Mercurial is still a
good idea, we'll create another clone in "sandbox/cpython" as the
default testing grounds.

Georg


From g.brandl at gmx.net  Sat Mar  5 15:30:21 2011
From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl)
Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2011 15:30:21 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] New repositories
In-Reply-To: <iktgtl$9li$1@dough.gmane.org>
References: <1299334722.3692.0.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<iktgtl$9li$1@dough.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <ikthg1$dqa$1@dough.gmane.org>

On 05.03.2011 15:20, Georg Brandl wrote:
> On 05.03.2011 15:18, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>> 
>> Hello,
>> 
>> Creation of the final hg repositories on hg.python.org is under way, so
>> please no test commits anymore.
> 
> And since testing things out if you're new to Mercurial is still a
> good idea, we'll create another clone in "sandbox/cpython" as the
> default testing grounds.

To clarify the reason for this: of course everybody can also create
their own clone cpython using the "server-side clone" feature at
http://hg.python.org/cpython/.  However, this repo has the same
consistency-checking hooks enabled as the /cpython repository, whereas
custom clones start out with no hooks.

Georg


From tjreedy at udel.edu  Sat Mar  5 19:06:33 2011
From: tjreedy at udel.edu (Terry Reedy)
Date: Sat, 05 Mar 2011 13:06:33 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] New repositories
In-Reply-To: <ikthg1$dqa$1@dough.gmane.org>
References: <1299334722.3692.0.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<iktgtl$9li$1@dough.gmane.org> <ikthg1$dqa$1@dough.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <4D727BA9.6060809@udel.edu>



On 3/5/2011 9:30 AM, Georg Brandl wrote:
> On 05.03.2011 15:20, Georg Brandl wrote:
>> On 05.03.2011 15:18, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>>>
>>> Hello,
>>>
>>> Creation of the final hg repositories on hg.python.org is under way, so
>>> please no test commits anymore.
>>
>> And since testing things out if you're new to Mercurial is still a
>> good idea, we'll create another clone in "sandbox/cpython" as the
>> default testing grounds.

Great, I was going to ask for this. Since I never mastered the 
(Tortoise) SVN merge-conflict-resolution tool, I would like to practice 
with merge-resolution of intentional conflicts between something pushed 
by someone else (and pulled by me) and my working copy.

> To clarify the reason for this: of course everybody can also create
> their own clone cpython using the "server-side clone" feature at
> http://hg.python.org/cpython/.  However, this repo has the same
> consistency-checking hooks enabled as the /cpython repository, whereas
> custom clones start out with no hooks.

Terry


From solipsis at pitrou.net  Sun Mar  6 09:42:02 2011
From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou)
Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2011 09:42:02 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] Push rights for Ross Lagerwall
Message-ID: <1299400922.3699.6.camel@localhost.localdomain>


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.



From victor.stinner at haypocalc.com  Sun Mar  6 10:55:18 2011
From: victor.stinner at haypocalc.com (Victor Stinner)
Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2011 10:55:18 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] Use hg commit --user?
Message-ID: <1299405318.30509.2.camel@marge>

Hi,

I do sometimes commit patches written by someone else. I tried to always
add him/her to Misc/ACKS and in the changelog entry (Misc/NEWS). With
git, it's possible to record an author different than the commiter. In
Mercurial, I see a --user option.

Can I use this option to commit a patch written by someone else? Or is
there another option for that?

If I use hg commit --user, is it possible to see somewhere that the
commiter was me?

Victor


From g.brandl at gmx.net  Sun Mar  6 11:23:05 2011
From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl)
Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2011 11:23:05 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] Use hg commit --user?
In-Reply-To: <1299405318.30509.2.camel@marge>
References: <1299405318.30509.2.camel@marge>
Message-ID: <ikvnaa$g6q$1@dough.gmane.org>

On 06.03.2011 10:55, Victor Stinner wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I do sometimes commit patches written by someone else. I tried to always
> add him/her to Misc/ACKS and in the changelog entry (Misc/NEWS). With
> git, it's possible to record an author different than the commiter. In
> Mercurial, I see a --user option.
> 
> Can I use this option to commit a patch written by someone else? Or is
> there another option for that?
> 
> If I use hg commit --user, is it possible to see somewhere that the
> commiter was me?

Basically, no.  If you want to honor contributors, put their name into
the commit message.

Georg



From ncoghlan at gmail.com  Sun Mar  6 12:48:14 2011
From: ncoghlan at gmail.com (Nick Coghlan)
Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2011 21:48:14 +1000
Subject: [python-committers] Push rights for Ross Lagerwall
In-Reply-To: <1299400922.3699.6.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1299400922.3699.6.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinUV87YV6-5cr_0rXJWYJTd72fp+PKQypJ_QJmM@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
>
> 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?).

I suspect that "pusher" has a few too many negative connotations to be
a popular alternative :)

I've certainly used "core dev" as an alternative shorthand for
"someone with the right to publish changes to the official CPython
repository" that is neutral regarding the VCS technology. I've seen
others using it that way, as well. I'd also say "committers" is still
fine, despite technically being incorrect now.

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan?? |?? ncoghlan at gmail.com?? |?? Brisbane, Australia

From dirkjan at ochtman.nl  Sun Mar  6 13:25:00 2011
From: dirkjan at ochtman.nl (Dirkjan Ochtman)
Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2011 13:25:00 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] Use hg commit --user?
In-Reply-To: <ikvnaa$g6q$1@dough.gmane.org>
References: <1299405318.30509.2.camel@marge> <ikvnaa$g6q$1@dough.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTik6X6aZ9bVADtE1jTbhUeL4Gwdj=_m3j3a3NWnz@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 11:23, Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:
>> If I use hg commit --user, is it possible to see somewhere that the
>> commiter was me?
>
> Basically, no. ?If you want to honor contributors, put their name into
> the commit message.

You can still see who pushed it in the python-checkins emails.

Cheers,

Dirkjan

From steve at holdenweb.com  Sun Mar  6 16:40:17 2011
From: steve at holdenweb.com (Steve Holden)
Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2011 10:40:17 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] Use hg commit --user?
In-Reply-To: <1299405318.30509.2.camel@marge>
References: <1299405318.30509.2.camel@marge>
Message-ID: <3C49D03D-B75E-4535-B711-F02D4E2908E5@holdenweb.com>

People who have not signed a contributor agreement should not be listed as code authors: this leads to non-auditable contributions and a lack of clarity as to intellectual property ownership that can have negative consequences. If you want to make someone an author, confirm they are contributors before you do so, please.

regards
 Steve

On Mar 6, 2011, at 4:55 AM, Victor Stinner wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I do sometimes commit patches written by someone else. I tried to always
> add him/her to Misc/ACKS and in the changelog entry (Misc/NEWS). With
> git, it's possible to record an author different than the commiter. In
> Mercurial, I see a --user option.
> 
> Can I use this option to commit a patch written by someone else? Or is
> there another option for that?
> 
> If I use hg commit --user, is it possible to see somewhere that the
> commiter was me?
> 
> Victor
> 
> _______________________________________________
> python-committers mailing list
> python-committers at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers


From solipsis at pitrou.net  Sun Mar  6 16:47:01 2011
From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou)
Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2011 16:47:01 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] Use hg commit --user?
In-Reply-To: <3C49D03D-B75E-4535-B711-F02D4E2908E5@holdenweb.com>
References: <1299405318.30509.2.camel@marge>
	<3C49D03D-B75E-4535-B711-F02D4E2908E5@holdenweb.com>
Message-ID: <1299426421.3699.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>

Le dimanche 06 mars 2011 ? 10:40 -0500, Steve Holden a ?crit :
> People who have not signed a contributor agreement should not be
> listed as code authors: this leads to non-auditable contributions and
> a lack of clarity as to intellectual property ownership that can have
> negative consequences. If you want to make someone an author, confirm
> they are contributors before you do so, please.

Is that some kind of joke?



From steve at holdenweb.com  Sun Mar  6 20:42:27 2011
From: steve at holdenweb.com (Steve Holden)
Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2011 14:42:27 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] Use hg commit --user?
In-Reply-To: <1299440037.3699.64.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1299405318.30509.2.camel@marge>
	<3C49D03D-B75E-4535-B711-F02D4E2908E5@holdenweb.com>
	<1299426421.3699.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<81524B85-F828-48F8-BD50-D6794D94DB64@holdenweb.com>
	<1299433520.3699.39.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<8B0B24D6-76B6-4132-89F2-2117D45F1287@holdenweb.com>
	<1299436815.3699.56.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4933AF0D-BABE-43C5-A8A9-5486F8260291@holdenweb.com>
	<1299440037.3699.64.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <2EA00EB3-2BC0-4EA2-B523-2FD89063A8D9@holdenweb.com>


On Mar 6, 2011, at 2:33 PM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:

> 
>>> Le dimanche 06 mars 2011 ? 13:19 -0500, Steve Holden a ?crit :
>>>> 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


From nad at acm.org  Sun Mar  6 22:08:53 2011
From: nad at acm.org (Ned Deily)
Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2011 13:08:53 -0800
Subject: [python-committers] Push rights for Ross Lagerwall
References: <1299400922.3699.6.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <nad-7A948E.13085306032011@news.gmane.org>

In article <1299400922.3699.6.camel at localhost.localdomain>,
 Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
> 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?).

Regardless of the term, +1.  Ross has contributed a lot of good stuff 
recently and has been very helpful on the tracker as well.

-- 
 Ned Deily,
 nad at acm.org


From rdmurray at bitdance.com  Sun Mar  6 23:13:11 2011
From: rdmurray at bitdance.com (R. David Murray)
Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2011 17:13:11 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] Push rights for Ross Lagerwall
In-Reply-To: <nad-7A948E.13085306032011@news.gmane.org>
References: <1299400922.3699.6.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<nad-7A948E.13085306032011@news.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <20110306221311.15C0B24A3A1@kimball.webabinitio.net>

On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 13:08:53 -0800, Ned Deily <nad at acm.org> wrote:
> In article <1299400922.3699.6.camel at localhost.localdomain>,
>  Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
> > 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?).
> 
> Regardless of the term, +1.  Ross has contributed a lot of good stuff 
> recently and has been very helpful on the tracker as well.

I haven't reviewed at his patch or tracker history myself, but he is
someone I have on my mental list as "probable future committer" based
on the activity I've noticed.  So if Antoine says it's time, I say +1.

--
R. David Murray                                      www.bitdance.com

From ziade.tarek at gmail.com  Sun Mar  6 23:22:16 2011
From: ziade.tarek at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Tarek_Ziad=E9?=)
Date: Sun, 6 Mar 2011 23:22:16 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] Push rights for Ross Lagerwall
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinUV87YV6-5cr_0rXJWYJTd72fp+PKQypJ_QJmM@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1299400922.3699.6.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTinUV87YV6-5cr_0rXJWYJTd72fp+PKQypJ_QJmM@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinaKGb=iqr-5kEBRAFGYb0GhSDj7ied-XvZ7+fZ@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 6, 2011 at 6:42 PM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
>>
>> 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?).
>
> I suspect that "pusher" has a few too many negative connotations to be
> a popular alternative :)
>
> I've certainly used "core dev" as an alternative shorthand for
> "someone with the right to publish changes to the official CPython
> repository" that is neutral regarding the VCS technology. I've seen
> others using it that way, as well. I'd also say "committers" is still
> fine, despite technically being incorrect now.

I would say that  "commiter" is still a valid term in a DVCS.

- Commiting means adding new revisions into a repository
- Pushing is just the action to copy some revisions from a repository to another

A "Python commiter" is authorized to commit revisions to the central
hg.python.org/cpython repository, whether it's by copying them from
another repository, or by doing a direct commit (via push). The latter
happens to be unnecessary,


Cheers
Tarek



> Cheers,
> Nick.
>
> --
> Nick Coghlan?? |?? ncoghlan at gmail.com?? |?? Brisbane, Australia
> _______________________________________________
> python-committers mailing list
> python-committers at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
>



-- 
Tarek Ziad? | http://ziade.org

From rdmurray at bitdance.com  Sun Mar  6 23:24:19 2011
From: rdmurray at bitdance.com (R. David Murray)
Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2011 17:24:19 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] Use hg commit --user?
In-Reply-To: <2EA00EB3-2BC0-4EA2-B523-2FD89063A8D9@holdenweb.com>
References: <1299405318.30509.2.camel@marge>
	<3C49D03D-B75E-4535-B711-F02D4E2908E5@holdenweb.com>
	<1299426421.3699.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<81524B85-F828-48F8-BD50-D6794D94DB64@holdenweb.com>
	<1299433520.3699.39.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<8B0B24D6-76B6-4132-89F2-2117D45F1287@holdenweb.com>
	<1299436815.3699.56.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4933AF0D-BABE-43C5-A8A9-5486F8260291@holdenweb.com>
	<1299440037.3699.64.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<2EA00EB3-2BC0-4EA2-B523-2FD89063A8D9@holdenweb.com>
Message-ID: <20110306222419.499F124A3A3@kimball.webabinitio.net>

On Sun, 06 Mar 2011 14:42:27 -0500, Steve Holden <steve at holdenweb.com> wrote:
> 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.

When we've had these discussions before, it was basically left up to
our judgement what constituted "enough code" to make worrying about a
contributor agreement necessary.  Certainly it does not seem that bug
fix commits of a few changed lines or even tens of changed lines is worth
worrying about:  how can fixing our own code incorporate someone else's
copyrighted work?  I think you'd be hard pressed to get such a claim
by a judge.  (Of course, I'm not a lawyer, so I'm probably wrong.)

Bigger chunks, especially features, yes.  Perhaps we have not been as
good about checking on agreements in those cases as we should have been.
Anyone care to review the last N changesets to find out?

Has any progress been made on an electronically signable agreement
and/or adding "posting a patch to this tracker means you have the right
to contribute it and you do contribute it" language to the tracker?

--
R. David Murray                                      www.bitdance.com

From ncoghlan at gmail.com  Mon Mar  7 00:46:57 2011
From: ncoghlan at gmail.com (Nick Coghlan)
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 09:46:57 +1000
Subject: [python-committers] Use hg commit --user?
In-Reply-To: <20110306222419.499F124A3A3@kimball.webabinitio.net>
References: <1299405318.30509.2.camel@marge>
	<3C49D03D-B75E-4535-B711-F02D4E2908E5@holdenweb.com>
	<1299426421.3699.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<81524B85-F828-48F8-BD50-D6794D94DB64@holdenweb.com>
	<1299433520.3699.39.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<8B0B24D6-76B6-4132-89F2-2117D45F1287@holdenweb.com>
	<1299436815.3699.56.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4933AF0D-BABE-43C5-A8A9-5486F8260291@holdenweb.com>
	<1299440037.3699.64.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<2EA00EB3-2BC0-4EA2-B523-2FD89063A8D9@holdenweb.com>
	<20110306222419.499F124A3A3@kimball.webabinitio.net>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=2FRJtYVDQmE36PD7vo6SRpRC4GYSDf5kUC+0x@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 8:24 AM, R. David Murray <rdmurray at bitdance.com> wrote:
> Has any progress been made on an electronically signable agreement
> and/or adding "posting a patch to this tracker means you have the right
> to contribute it and you do contribute it" language to the tracker?

Note that the latter point (regarding implicit declarations of "right
to submit" and actual submission when posting patches to the tracker)
is something we're already effectively relying on when incorporating
posted patches. The fact that such patches are almost always
derivative of the Python source in the first place also significantly
reduces the chance of legal hassles.

The situation with committers is different, because each of us can
push stuff straight into the source tree without going via the
tracker. The only way to keep our noses clean from a legal perspective
at that point is to have a contributor agreement in place that covers
everything we commit to the main repository.

The contributor-agreements-for-non-committers issue mainly comes up
when there is a substantial piece of code that was originally written
for something else, that is suggested as a patch to CPython (e.g. the
locale neutral number parsing and formatting routines).

Still, Steve's right: when we commit something, *we're* the ones
making the assertion that the change is small enough not to need a
contributor agreement, so the commit record should reflect that.

If something seems iffy, bring it up on python-dev (preferably cc'ing
VanL directly as well).

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan?? |?? ncoghlan at gmail.com?? |?? Brisbane, Australia

From solipsis at pitrou.net  Mon Mar  7 19:48:33 2011
From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou)
Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2011 19:48:33 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] Use hg commit --user?
In-Reply-To: <20110306222419.499F124A3A3@kimball.webabinitio.net>
References: <1299405318.30509.2.camel@marge>
	<3C49D03D-B75E-4535-B711-F02D4E2908E5@holdenweb.com>
	<1299426421.3699.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<81524B85-F828-48F8-BD50-D6794D94DB64@holdenweb.com>
	<1299433520.3699.39.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<8B0B24D6-76B6-4132-89F2-2117D45F1287@holdenweb.com>
	<1299436815.3699.56.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4933AF0D-BABE-43C5-A8A9-5486F8260291@holdenweb.com>
	<1299440037.3699.64.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<2EA00EB3-2BC0-4EA2-B523-2FD89063A8D9@holdenweb.com>
	<20110306222419.499F124A3A3@kimball.webabinitio.net>
Message-ID: <1299523713.3770.91.camel@localhost.localdomain>

Le dimanche 06 mars 2011 ? 17:24 -0500, R. David Murray a ?crit :
> Has any progress been made on an electronically signable agreement
> and/or adding "posting a patch to this tracker means you have the right
> to contribute it and you do contribute it" language to the tracker?

+1. That would be a very worthwhile thing for the PSF to spend time on,
and could solve all practical issues with the contributor agreement.
With a preference with David's latter proposition.

Regards

Antoine.



From jnoller at gmail.com  Tue Mar  8 04:19:11 2011
From: jnoller at gmail.com (Jesse Noller)
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 22:19:11 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] Use hg commit --user?
In-Reply-To: <1299523713.3770.91.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1299405318.30509.2.camel@marge>
	<3C49D03D-B75E-4535-B711-F02D4E2908E5@holdenweb.com>
	<1299426421.3699.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<81524B85-F828-48F8-BD50-D6794D94DB64@holdenweb.com>
	<1299433520.3699.39.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<8B0B24D6-76B6-4132-89F2-2117D45F1287@holdenweb.com>
	<1299436815.3699.56.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4933AF0D-BABE-43C5-A8A9-5486F8260291@holdenweb.com>
	<1299440037.3699.64.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<2EA00EB3-2BC0-4EA2-B523-2FD89063A8D9@holdenweb.com>
	<20110306222419.499F124A3A3@kimball.webabinitio.net>
	<1299523713.3770.91.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikCd0WD000ES6Wc+soQHHdp+pR_HBYhsfS8v9Kv@mail.gmail.com>

On Mon, Mar 7, 2011 at 1:48 PM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
> Le dimanche 06 mars 2011 ? 17:24 -0500, R. David Murray a ?crit :
>> Has any progress been made on an electronically signable agreement
>> and/or adding "posting a patch to this tracker means you have the right
>> to contribute it and you do contribute it" language to the tracker?
>
> +1. That would be a very worthwhile thing for the PSF to spend time on,
> and could solve all practical issues with the contributor agreement.
> With a preference with David's latter proposition.
>
> Regards
>
> Antoine.

I've raised this question on the board level in the past, and will do
so again at the members meeting.

jesse.

From g.rodola at gmail.com  Tue Mar  8 09:53:19 2011
From: g.rodola at gmail.com (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Giampaolo_Rodol=E0?=)
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 09:53:19 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] Push rights for Ross Lagerwall
Message-ID: <AANLkTinRhHCnQ+yFX7ZiCm9PwArWKCfA9k3fEiV=-EsR@mail.gmail.com>

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/

From raymond.hettinger at gmail.com  Tue Mar  8 09:57:06 2011
From: raymond.hettinger at gmail.com (Raymond Hettinger)
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 00:57:06 -0800
Subject: [python-committers] Push rights for Ross Lagerwall
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinRhHCnQ+yFX7ZiCm9PwArWKCfA9k3fEiV=-EsR@mail.gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTinRhHCnQ+yFX7ZiCm9PwArWKCfA9k3fEiV=-EsR@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <9A87DA92-38DA-4EB3-8A84-648481A65A33@gmail.com>


On Mar 8, 2011, at 12:53 AM, Giampaolo Rodol? wrote:

> 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.

Do we have a signed contributor agreement?


Raymond
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20110308/e9d5568f/attachment.html>

From g.brandl at gmx.net  Tue Mar  8 12:32:12 2011
From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl)
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2011 12:32:12 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] Roundup integration hook added
Message-ID: <il545k$k86$1@dough.gmane.org>

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 at 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


From solipsis at pitrou.net  Tue Mar  8 15:19:55 2011
From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou)
Date: Tue, 08 Mar 2011 15:19:55 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] Push rights for Ross Lagerwall
In-Reply-To: <9A87DA92-38DA-4EB3-8A84-648481A65A33@gmail.com>
References: <AANLkTinRhHCnQ+yFX7ZiCm9PwArWKCfA9k3fEiV=-EsR@mail.gmail.com>
	<9A87DA92-38DA-4EB3-8A84-648481A65A33@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1299593995.3763.20.camel@localhost.localdomain>

Le mardi 08 mars 2011 ? 00:57 -0800, Raymond Hettinger a ?crit :

> 
> 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.



From steve at holdenweb.com  Tue Mar  8 16:27:20 2011
From: steve at holdenweb.com (Steve Holden)
Date: Tue, 8 Mar 2011 10:27:20 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] Push rights for Ross Lagerwall
In-Reply-To: <1299593995.3763.20.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <AANLkTinRhHCnQ+yFX7ZiCm9PwArWKCfA9k3fEiV=-EsR@mail.gmail.com>
	<9A87DA92-38DA-4EB3-8A84-648481A65A33@gmail.com>
	<1299593995.3763.20.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <573181BC-FE94-4CA9-A3D1-AAEC268A408A@holdenweb.com>

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 ? 00:57 -0800, Raymond Hettinger a ?crit :
> 
>> 
>> 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 at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers


From solipsis at pitrou.net  Wed Mar  9 12:20:27 2011
From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou)
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 12:20:27 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] [Fwd: Re:  Push rights for Ross Lagerwall]
Message-ID: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>


What is the process now? Is it a showstopper?



-------- Message transf?r? --------
De: Pat Campbell <patcam at python.org>
?: Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net>
Cc: Steve Holden <steve at 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 at pitrou.net>
wrote:
        
        Absolutely no idea. Either very recently, or earlier.
        
        
        
        Le mardi 08 mars 2011 ? 11:07 -0500, Pat Campbell a ?crit :
        
        > Hi All:
        >
        > When should it have come in?
        >
        > Thanks,
        > Pat
        >
        >
        > On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Steve Holden
        <steve at 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 ? 00:57 -0800, Raymond
        Hettinger a
        >         ?crit :
        >         >
        >         >>
        >         >> 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 at python.org
        >         >
        http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > --
        > Pat Campbell
        > PSF Administrator/Secretary
        > patcam at python.org
        
        
        



-- 
Pat Campbell
PSF Administrator/Secretary
patcam at python.org



From ncoghlan at gmail.com  Wed Mar  9 12:29:22 2011
From: ncoghlan at gmail.com (Nick Coghlan)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 06:29:22 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinakuYrZW0OxpMsstnPGynri=NAS7qj0yGmu-oW@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 6:20 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
>
> What is the process now? Is it a showstopper?

I believe so (cc'ed Van to double check).

I know a digiital photograph is good enough for acceptance of a PSF
nomination - is it enough for the contributor's agreement as well?

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan?? |?? ncoghlan at gmail.com?? |?? Brisbane, Australia

From solipsis at pitrou.net  Wed Mar  9 12:32:45 2011
From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou)
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 12:32:45 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinakuYrZW0OxpMsstnPGynri=NAS7qj0yGmu-oW@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTinakuYrZW0OxpMsstnPGynri=NAS7qj0yGmu-oW@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1299670365.3749.4.camel@localhost.localdomain>

Le mercredi 09 mars 2011 ? 06:29 -0500, Nick Coghlan a ?crit :
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 6:20 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
> >
> > What is the process now? Is it a showstopper?
> 
> I believe so (cc'ed Van to double check).
> 
> I know a digiital photograph is good enough for acceptance of a PSF
> nomination - is it enough for the contributor's agreement as well?

? I've never sent any photo to the PSF... (and I don't intend doing so)



From mal at egenix.com  Wed Mar  9 12:34:52 2011
From: mal at egenix.com (M.-A. Lemburg)
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 12:34:52 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] [Fwd: Re:  Push rights for Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>

Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> 
> What is the process now? Is it a showstopper?

Yes.

Developers uploading copyrightable patches to the tracker
need to sign the contributor agreement before those patches
can make it into the core - even before they get direct commit
rights.

Otherwise, the PSF does not have the right to redistribute that
code under the PSF license.

http://docs.python.org/devguide/coredev.html#sign-a-contributor-agreement

> -------- Message transf?r? --------
> De: Pat Campbell <patcam at python.org>
> ?: Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net>
> Cc: Steve Holden <steve at 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 at pitrou.net>
> wrote:
>         
>         Absolutely no idea. Either very recently, or earlier.
>         
>         
>         
>         Le mardi 08 mars 2011 ? 11:07 -0500, Pat Campbell a ?crit :
>         
>         > Hi All:
>         >
>         > When should it have come in?
>         >
>         > Thanks,
>         > Pat
>         >
>         >
>         > On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Steve Holden
>         <steve at 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 ? 00:57 -0800, Raymond
>         Hettinger a
>         >         ?crit :
>         >         >
>         >         >>
>         >         >> 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 at python.org
>         >         >
>         http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         >
>         > --
>         > Pat Campbell
>         > PSF Administrator/Secretary
>         > patcam at python.org
>         
>         
>         
> 
> 
> 

-- 
Marc-Andre Lemburg
eGenix.com

Professional Python Services directly from the Source  (#1, Mar 09 2011)
>>> Python/Zope Consulting and Support ...        http://www.egenix.com/
>>> mxODBC.Zope.Database.Adapter ...             http://zope.egenix.com/
>>> mxODBC, mxDateTime, mxTextTools ...        http://python.egenix.com/
________________________________________________________________________

::: Try our new mxODBC.Connect Python Database Interface for free ! ::::


   eGenix.com Software, Skills and Services GmbH  Pastor-Loeh-Str.48
    D-40764 Langenfeld, Germany. CEO Dipl.-Math. Marc-Andre Lemburg
           Registered at Amtsgericht Duesseldorf: HRB 46611
               http://www.egenix.com/company/contact/

From ncoghlan at gmail.com  Wed Mar  9 12:38:05 2011
From: ncoghlan at gmail.com (Nick Coghlan)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 06:38:05 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <1299670365.3749.4.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTinakuYrZW0OxpMsstnPGynri=NAS7qj0yGmu-oW@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299670365.3749.4.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <AANLkTik_=882cB=6jpRbLnu40RzU_XYS12Z3c252pSjh@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 6:32 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
>> I know a digiital photograph is good enough for acceptance of a PSF
>> nomination - is it enough for the contributor's agreement as well?
>
> ? I've never sent any photo to the PSF... (and I don't intend doing so)

"... of the signed nomination form ..." (sorry, original was
unnecessarily terse - the digital photo was basically the modern day
alternative to faxing or mailing the form).

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan?? |?? ncoghlan at gmail.com?? |?? Brisbane, Australia

From solipsis at pitrou.net  Wed Mar  9 12:46:12 2011
From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou)
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 12:46:12 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] [Fwd: Re:  Push rights for Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
Message-ID: <1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>


Ok, so, since the PSF appears to have a meeting very soon, can I request
that the PSF gets its act together and solves the "electronic
contributor agreement" issue once and for all?

The way we core developers are prevented from working properly is
**totally** unacceptable.

Thank you

Antoine.



Le mercredi 09 mars 2011 ? 12:34 +0100, M.-A. Lemburg a ?crit :
> Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> > 
> > What is the process now? Is it a showstopper?
> 
> Yes.
> 
> Developers uploading copyrightable patches to the tracker
> need to sign the contributor agreement before those patches
> can make it into the core - even before they get direct commit
> rights.
> 
> Otherwise, the PSF does not have the right to redistribute that
> code under the PSF license.
> 
> http://docs.python.org/devguide/coredev.html#sign-a-contributor-agreement
> 
> > -------- Message transf?r? --------
> > De: Pat Campbell <patcam at python.org>
> > ?: Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net>
> > Cc: Steve Holden <steve at 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 at pitrou.net>
> > wrote:
> >         
> >         Absolutely no idea. Either very recently, or earlier.
> >         
> >         
> >         
> >         Le mardi 08 mars 2011 ? 11:07 -0500, Pat Campbell a ?crit :
> >         
> >         > Hi All:
> >         >
> >         > When should it have come in?
> >         >
> >         > Thanks,
> >         > Pat
> >         >
> >         >
> >         > On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Steve Holden
> >         <steve at 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 ? 00:57 -0800, Raymond
> >         Hettinger a
> >         >         ?crit :
> >         >         >
> >         >         >>
> >         >         >> 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 at python.org
> >         >         >
> >         http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
> >         >
> >         >
> >         >
> >         >
> >         > --
> >         > Pat Campbell
> >         > PSF Administrator/Secretary
> >         > patcam at python.org
> >         
> >         
> >         
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 



From steve at holdenweb.com  Wed Mar  9 13:00:46 2011
From: steve at holdenweb.com (Steve Holden)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 07:00:46 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
	Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>

Fortunately this *can be discussed at the members' meeting. Since I don't always follow python-dev I wasn't aware this was blocking commits - the process is pretty straightforward as it is. Guido established the Foundation to do what it's doing, but we would love to do it more efficiently. But anyone with access to a fax machine or a scanner can submit a contributor agreement very simply.

However, specific ideas about how to action this request are also welcome. We certainly don't want to hold up development. Unfortunately we want encumbered code even less.

regards
 Steve


On Mar 9, 2011, at 6:46 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:

> 
> Ok, so, since the PSF appears to have a meeting very soon, can I request
> that the PSF gets its act together and solves the "electronic
> contributor agreement" issue once and for all?
> 
> The way we core developers are prevented from working properly is
> **totally** unacceptable.
> 
> Thank you
> 
> Antoine.
> 
> 
> 
> Le mercredi 09 mars 2011 ? 12:34 +0100, M.-A. Lemburg a ?crit :
>> Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>>> 
>>> What is the process now? Is it a showstopper?
>> 
>> Yes.
>> 
>> Developers uploading copyrightable patches to the tracker
>> need to sign the contributor agreement before those patches
>> can make it into the core - even before they get direct commit
>> rights.
>> 
>> Otherwise, the PSF does not have the right to redistribute that
>> code under the PSF license.
>> 
>> http://docs.python.org/devguide/coredev.html#sign-a-contributor-agreement
>> 
>>> -------- Message transf?r? --------
>>> De: Pat Campbell <patcam at python.org>
>>> ?: Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net>
>>> Cc: Steve Holden <steve at 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 at pitrou.net>
>>> wrote:
>>> 
>>>        Absolutely no idea. Either very recently, or earlier.
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>>        Le mardi 08 mars 2011 ? 11:07 -0500, Pat Campbell a ?crit :
>>> 
>>>> Hi All:
>>>> 
>>>> When should it have come in?
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Pat
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Steve Holden
>>>        <steve at 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 ? 00:57 -0800, Raymond
>>>        Hettinger a
>>>>        ?crit :
>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 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 at python.org
>>>>> 
>>>        http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Pat Campbell
>>>> PSF Administrator/Secretary
>>>> patcam at python.org
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> PSF-Members mailing list
> PSF-Members at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/psf-members


From solipsis at pitrou.net  Wed Mar  9 13:04:07 2011
From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou)
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 13:04:07 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
 Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>
Message-ID: <1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>

Le mercredi 09 mars 2011 ? 07:00 -0500, Steve Holden a ?crit :
> But anyone with access to a fax machine or a scanner can submit a
> contributor agreement very simply.

That's like saying "anyone with access to a printer can send a patch via
postal mail".
Sorry, but we are in the 21th century now.


> We certainly don't want to hold up development.

Unfortunately, that's what you are doing.
You are also making people frustrated.
Please solve the issue.



From jnoller at gmail.com  Wed Mar  9 13:08:42 2011
From: jnoller at gmail.com (Jesse Noller)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 07:08:42 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] [Fwd: Re:  Push rights for Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <F39896F9-96F5-489D-A02A-4E95C62B1BA0@gmail.com>

We have to have contributor agreements on file for core committers.

On Mar 9, 2011, at 6:20 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:

> 
> What is the process now? Is it a showstopper?
> 
> 
> 
> -------- Message transf?r? --------
> De: Pat Campbell <patcam at python.org>
> ?: Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net>
> Cc: Steve Holden <steve at 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 at pitrou.net>
> wrote:
> 
>        Absolutely no idea. Either very recently, or earlier.
> 
> 
> 
>        Le mardi 08 mars 2011 ? 11:07 -0500, Pat Campbell a ?crit :
> 
>> Hi All:
>> 
>> When should it have come in?
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Pat
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 10:27 AM, Steve Holden
>        <steve at 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 ? 00:57 -0800, Raymond
>        Hettinger a
>>        ?crit :
>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 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 at python.org
>>> 
>        http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> --
>> Pat Campbell
>> PSF Administrator/Secretary
>> patcam at python.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Pat Campbell
> PSF Administrator/Secretary
> patcam at python.org
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> python-committers mailing list
> python-committers at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers

From ncoghlan at gmail.com  Wed Mar  9 13:12:14 2011
From: ncoghlan at gmail.com (Nick Coghlan)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 07:12:14 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
	Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>
	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 7:04 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
> Le mercredi 09 mars 2011 ? 07:00 -0500, Steve Holden a ?crit :
>> But anyone with access to a fax machine or a scanner can submit a
>> contributor agreement very simply.
>
> That's like saying "anyone with access to a printer can send a patch via
> postal mail".
> Sorry, but we are in the 21th century now.

Print form, fill in form, sign form, take photo, upload photo, email
photo isn't all that onerous a task.

Compared to setting up GPG (or something of that ilk), it's positively
straightforward.

Please don't blame the PSF for the inadequate state of digital
signature technologies and their uncertain place in law.

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan?? |?? ncoghlan at gmail.com?? |?? Brisbane, Australia

From ncoghlan at gmail.com  Wed Mar  9 13:25:26 2011
From: ncoghlan at gmail.com (Nick Coghlan)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 07:25:26 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
	Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>
	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
> Please don't blame the PSF for the inadequate state of digital
> signature technologies and their uncertain place in law.

What we *could* do though, is have a better explanation of the reasons
behind the relatively archaic process for submission of contributor
forms.

Alternatively, something that occurred to me is that every core dev
*must* set up SSH correctly to push changes. So why not have a text
version of the form and require people to push a signed copy of their
completed form as a text file to that repository before their access
to the main repository is switched on?

We're relying on the SSH keys to identify submitters of contributions,
so sure we could rely on them for the form sign-off as well...

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan?? |?? ncoghlan at gmail.com?? |?? Brisbane, Australia

From jnoller at gmail.com  Wed Mar  9 13:25:38 2011
From: jnoller at gmail.com (Jesse Noller)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 07:25:38 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
	Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikL7SKzVsFf_dbhjthAo-7JZgKfD1F=ytZBEh25@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 7:00 AM, Steve Holden <steve at holdenweb.com> wrote:
> Fortunately this *can be discussed at the members' meeting. Since I don't always follow python-dev I wasn't aware this was blocking commits - the process is pretty straightforward as it is. Guido established the Foundation to do what it's doing, but we would love to do it more efficiently. But anyone with access to a fax machine or a scanner can submit a contributor agreement very simply.
>
> However, specific ideas about how to action this request are also welcome. We certainly don't want to hold up development. Unfortunately we want encumbered code even less.
>
> regards
> ?Steve
>

I've brought this up at board meetings in the past. Specific ideas
even, and I have not received a very warm welcome. The quickest path?
Don't roll our own, and use something like what RackSpace (a multi
million dollar company and a large army of lawyers) uses for
OpenStack:

https://rackspace.echosign.com/public/hostedForm?formid=ABCZR72YX57B

Seems pretty cut and dry to me. We should *not* implement our own.
There is also:

http://code.google.com/legal/individual-cla-v1.0.html

So, this is definite fodder for the members meeting this week. I
believe we have an actionable path.

Jesse

From solipsis at pitrou.net  Wed Mar  9 13:37:50 2011
From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou)
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 13:37:50 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
 Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>
	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>

Le mercredi 09 mars 2011 ? 07:25 -0500, Nick Coghlan a ?crit :
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Please don't blame the PSF for the inadequate state of digital
> > signature technologies and their uncertain place in law.
> 
> What we *could* do though, is have a better explanation

No, sorry, that doesn't parse.
We don't need an explanation, we need a *solution*. Nobody cares about
explanations when most online projects accept patches and enrole
committers freely.

If e-commerce or PayPal is satisfied with a *totally automated Web
process*, then the PSF shouldn't need *physical* paperwork with *manual
approval*. That's all.




From jnoller at gmail.com  Wed Mar  9 13:39:36 2011
From: jnoller at gmail.com (Jesse Noller)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 07:39:36 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
	Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>
	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=kBgGDGiQR=n07QDC7hVNb86ayGdb9_69aVV0o@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 7:37 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
> Le mercredi 09 mars 2011 ? 07:25 -0500, Nick Coghlan a ?crit :
>> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 7:12 AM, Nick Coghlan <ncoghlan at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Please don't blame the PSF for the inadequate state of digital
>> > signature technologies and their uncertain place in law.
>>
>> What we *could* do though, is have a better explanation
>
> No, sorry, that doesn't parse.
> We don't need an explanation, we need a *solution*. Nobody cares about
> explanations when most online projects accept patches and enrole
> committers freely.

While I agree with you that we need to do this better; don't interpret
what "other projects do" as "doing it right".

From solipsis at pitrou.net  Wed Mar  9 13:42:20 2011
From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou)
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 13:42:20 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
 Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=kBgGDGiQR=n07QDC7hVNb86ayGdb9_69aVV0o@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>
	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTi=kBgGDGiQR=n07QDC7hVNb86ayGdb9_69aVV0o@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1299674540.3749.20.camel@localhost.localdomain>


> > No, sorry, that doesn't parse.
> > We don't need an explanation, we need a *solution*. Nobody cares about
> > explanations when most online projects accept patches and enrole
> > committers freely.
> 
> While I agree with you that we need to do this better; don't interpret
> what "other projects do" as "doing it right".

They definitely do it right from a social perspective.




From ncoghlan at gmail.com  Wed Mar  9 13:46:14 2011
From: ncoghlan at gmail.com (Nick Coghlan)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 07:46:14 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
	Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <1299674540.3749.20.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>
	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTi=kBgGDGiQR=n07QDC7hVNb86ayGdb9_69aVV0o@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674540.3749.20.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <AANLkTim11z5Z1eygqemMMpNmAobnGhyqVF-YqA6xEaH-@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 7:42 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
>
>> > No, sorry, that doesn't parse.
>> > We don't need an explanation, we need a *solution*. Nobody cares about
>> > explanations when most online projects accept patches and enrole
>> > committers freely.
>>
>> While I agree with you that we need to do this better; don't interpret
>> what "other projects do" as "doing it right".
>
> They definitely do it right from a social perspective.

Which is made significantly easier by the fact that a lot of them
couldn't care less about the legal perspective :)

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan?? |?? ncoghlan at gmail.com?? |?? Brisbane, Australia

From jnoller at gmail.com  Wed Mar  9 13:46:44 2011
From: jnoller at gmail.com (Jesse Noller)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 07:46:44 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
	Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <1299674540.3749.20.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>
	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTi=kBgGDGiQR=n07QDC7hVNb86ayGdb9_69aVV0o@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674540.3749.20.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinZOOKkjADwOjP2noJrmjYZYu8dkaRAAm3Ms18_@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 7:42 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
>
>> > No, sorry, that doesn't parse.
>> > We don't need an explanation, we need a *solution*. Nobody cares about
>> > explanations when most online projects accept patches and enrole
>> > committers freely.
>>
>> While I agree with you that we need to do this better; don't interpret
>> what "other projects do" as "doing it right".
>
> They definitely do it right from a social perspective.
>
>

And probably not from a legal perspective. Ask anyone who has tried to
relicense a project and attempted to track down old willy nilly
contributors, or been forced to got and get CLAs after the fact.

I completely agree with you - we have to make this process modern, and
simple. We just disagree on if it's necessary or not.

From solipsis at pitrou.net  Wed Mar  9 13:53:38 2011
From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou)
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 13:53:38 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
 Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinZOOKkjADwOjP2noJrmjYZYu8dkaRAAm3Ms18_@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>
	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTi=kBgGDGiQR=n07QDC7hVNb86ayGdb9_69aVV0o@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674540.3749.20.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTinZOOKkjADwOjP2noJrmjYZYu8dkaRAAm3Ms18_@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1299675218.3749.26.camel@localhost.localdomain>


> I completely agree with you - we have to make this process modern, and
> simple. We just disagree on if it's necessary or not.

I hate arguments from authority, but here's the 2010 breakdown of
committers by changesets (thanks Mercurial :-)). Who do you think is the
most sensitive to such issues?

$ hg churn -c -d 2010
georg at python.org                  1087 *********************************
solipsis at pitrou.net                987 ******************************
benjamin at python.org                959 *****************************
victor.stinner at haypocalc.com       696 *********************
dickinsm at gmail.com                 629 *******************
ezio.melotti at gmail.com             462 **************
rdmurray at bitdance.com              404 ************
orsenthil at gmail.com                368 ***********
python at rcn.com                     331 **********
florent.xicluna at gmail.com          281 *********
brian.curtin at gmail.com             243 *******
alexander.belopolsky at gmail.com     237 *******
fuzzyman at voidspace.org.uk          195 ******
ronaldoussoren at mac.com             192 ******
merwok at netwok.org                  180 *****
ziade.tarek at gmail.com              168 *****
bcannon at gmail.com                  160 *****
martin at v.loewis.de                 160 *****
vinay_sajip at yahoo.co.uk            159 *****
amk at amk.ca                         125 ****
ocean-city at m2.ccsnet.ne.jp         121 ****
greg at mad-scientist.com             119 ****
stefan at bytereef.org                 98 ***
eric at trueblade.com                  93 ***
doko at ubuntu.com                     85 ***
g.rodola at gmail.com                  82 **
barry at python.org                    77 **
ncoghlan at gmail.com                  47 *
amauryfa at gmail.com                  36 *
daniel at stutzbachenterprises.com     34 *
tjreedy at udel.edu                    26 *
steven.bethard at gmail.com            23 *
lukasz at langa.pl                     23 *
lars at gustaebel.de                   23 *
collinw at gmail.com                   22 *
alexandre at peadrop.com               20 *
theller at ctypes.org                  20 *
fdrake at acm.org                      19 *
jcea at jcea.es                        18 *
jafo at tummy.com                      16 
mail at timgolden.me.uk                16 
exarkun at divmod.com                  15 
pjenvey at underboss.org               12 
larry at hastings.org                  11 
brian at sweetapp.com                  11 
kristjan at ccpgames.com               11 
mal at egenix.com                      11 
gh at ghaering.de                       9 
jackdied at gmail.com                   8 
richard at commonground.com.au          7 
skip at pobox.com                       6 
dirkjan at ochtman.nl                   6 
askh at opera.com                       6 
jyasskin at gmail.com                   5 
dmalcolm at redhat.com                  4 
pje at telecommunity.com                4 
asmodai at in-nomine.org                4 
arigo at tunes.org                      4 
jnoller at gmail.com                    3 
doug.hellmann at gmail.com              3 
kbk at shore.net                        1 
facundobatista at gmail.com             1 




From eric at trueblade.com  Wed Mar  9 13:57:20 2011
From: eric at trueblade.com (Eric Smith)
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 07:57:20 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
 Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <1299675218.3749.26.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>	<1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<AANLkTi=kBgGDGiQR=n07QDC7hVNb86ayGdb9_69aVV0o@mail.gmail.com>	<1299674540.3749.20.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<AANLkTinZOOKkjADwOjP2noJrmjYZYu8dkaRAAm3Ms18_@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299675218.3749.26.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <4D777930.2050903@trueblade.com>

On 3/9/2011 7:53 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>
>> I completely agree with you - we have to make this process modern, and
>> simple. We just disagree on if it's necessary or not.
>
> I hate arguments from authority, but here's the 2010 breakdown of
> committers by changesets (thanks Mercurial :-)). Who do you think is the
> most sensitive to such issues?

I'm not sure what you're arguing for. Are you saying the PSF shouldn't 
bother making sure the copyright to python is unencumbered?

Eric.

From solipsis at pitrou.net  Wed Mar  9 14:07:43 2011
From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou)
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 14:07:43 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
 Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <4D777930.2050903@trueblade.com>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>
	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTi=kBgGDGiQR=n07QDC7hVNb86ayGdb9_69aVV0o@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674540.3749.20.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTinZOOKkjADwOjP2noJrmjYZYu8dkaRAAm3Ms18_@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299675218.3749.26.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D777930.2050903@trueblade.com>
Message-ID: <1299676063.3749.35.camel@localhost.localdomain>


> I'm not sure what you're arguing for. Are you saying the PSF shouldn't 
> bother making sure the copyright to python is unencumbered?

Eric, let me quote myself again:

        Ok, so, since the PSF appears to have a meeting very soon, can I
        request
        that the PSF gets its act together and solves the "electronic
        contributor agreement" issue once and for all?
        
        The way we core developers are prevented from working properly
        is
        **totally** unacceptable.
        
        Thank you


I don't care and don't want to argue (I insist about this) about
religions, be it christianism or intellectual property.
If you think a legal rule is needed, please just *ensure it doesn't get
in the way*. That's your job as a self-proclaimed "protector of IP
rights", not mine.

And if you can't pull it off, then admit you failed in your duty and
stop bothering us core developers.



From jnoller at gmail.com  Wed Mar  9 14:07:56 2011
From: jnoller at gmail.com (Jesse Noller)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 08:07:56 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
	Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <1299675218.3749.26.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>
	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTi=kBgGDGiQR=n07QDC7hVNb86ayGdb9_69aVV0o@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674540.3749.20.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTinZOOKkjADwOjP2noJrmjYZYu8dkaRAAm3Ms18_@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299675218.3749.26.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinSXdJCVuppUwyXENOE6Rrg5nNaqvXbjNLE80rv@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
>
>> I completely agree with you - we have to make this process modern, and
>> simple. We just disagree on if it's necessary or not.
>
> I hate arguments from authority, but here's the 2010 breakdown of
> committers by changesets (thanks Mercurial :-)). Who do you think is the
> most sensitive to such issues?
>

Antoine; if you don't want the help - I don't need to help.

From solipsis at pitrou.net  Wed Mar  9 14:10:36 2011
From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou)
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 14:10:36 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
 Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinSXdJCVuppUwyXENOE6Rrg5nNaqvXbjNLE80rv@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>
	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTi=kBgGDGiQR=n07QDC7hVNb86ayGdb9_69aVV0o@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674540.3749.20.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTinZOOKkjADwOjP2noJrmjYZYu8dkaRAAm3Ms18_@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299675218.3749.26.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTinSXdJCVuppUwyXENOE6Rrg5nNaqvXbjNLE80rv@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1299676236.3749.38.camel@localhost.localdomain>

Le mercredi 09 mars 2011 ? 08:07 -0500, Jesse Noller a ?crit :
> On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 7:53 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
> >
> >> I completely agree with you - we have to make this process modern, and
> >> simple. We just disagree on if it's necessary or not.
> >
> > I hate arguments from authority, but here's the 2010 breakdown of
> > committers by changesets (thanks Mercurial :-)). Who do you think is the
> > most sensitive to such issues?
> >
> 
> Antoine; if you don't want the help - I don't need to help.

I have started this thread by asking that the PSF solves the situation.
That is the very definition of asking for help in my book.



From steve at holdenweb.com  Wed Mar  9 14:23:46 2011
From: steve at holdenweb.com (Steve Holden)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 08:23:46 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
	Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <1299676063.3749.35.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>
	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTi=kBgGDGiQR=n07QDC7hVNb86ayGdb9_69aVV0o@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674540.3749.20.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTinZOOKkjADwOjP2noJrmjYZYu8dkaRAAm3Ms18_@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299675218.3749.26.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D777930.2050903@trueblade.com>
	<1299676063.3749.35.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <6499E317-4F23-4439-B8C6-04D071D360E1@holdenweb.com>

On Mar 9, 2011, at 8:07 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:

> I don't care and don't want to argue (I insist about this) about
> religions, be it christianism or intellectual property.
> If you think a legal rule is needed, please just *ensure it doesn't get
> in the way*. That's your job as a self-proclaimed "protector of IP
> rights", not mine.
> 
As I have already pointed out in this thread, the PSF is not a "self-proclaimed" anything. It was established by Guido precisely to ensure that the IP was unencumbered. So Guido clearly thinks the rule is needed.

I think Jesse has pointed us to some very satisfactory potential solutions. I also think you are making a mountain out of a molehill. Electronic forms are easier to deal with, but I seriously doubt their absence has lost as much development effort as the total collective developer time already expended on this thread :-)

regards
 Steve

From solipsis at pitrou.net  Wed Mar  9 14:35:48 2011
From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou)
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 14:35:48 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
 Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <6499E317-4F23-4439-B8C6-04D071D360E1@holdenweb.com>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>
	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTi=kBgGDGiQR=n07QDC7hVNb86ayGdb9_69aVV0o@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674540.3749.20.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTinZOOKkjADwOjP2noJrmjYZYu8dkaRAAm3Ms18_@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299675218.3749.26.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D777930.2050903@trueblade.com>
	<1299676063.3749.35.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<6499E317-4F23-4439-B8C6-04D071D360E1@holdenweb.com>
Message-ID: <1299677748.3749.49.camel@localhost.localdomain>


Hello Steve,

> > I don't care and don't want to argue (I insist about this) about
> > religions, be it christianism or intellectual property.
> > If you think a legal rule is needed, please just *ensure it doesn't get
> > in the way*. That's your job as a self-proclaimed "protector of IP
> > rights", not mine.
> > 
> As I have already pointed out in this thread, the PSF is not a
> "self-proclaimed" anything. It was established by Guido precisely to
> ensure that the IP was unencumbered. So Guido clearly thinks the rule
> is needed.

I would like to hear Guido's opinion today about this. Python's
development is not the same as it was 10 years ago, and the world has
changed too.

> I think Jesse has pointed us to some very satisfactory potential
> solutions. I also think you are making a mountain out of a molehill.

The reason I am making a mountain out of a slightly oversized molehill
is that otherwise it seems people here don't care to solve the issue,
and instead keep patronizing about how the current process is fine
(which it is!... as long as it isn't actually applied...).

> Electronic forms are easier to deal with, but I seriously doubt their
> absence has lost as much development effort as the total collective
> developer time already expended on this thread :-)

Well, I agree that not so much development effort has been lost because
of us checking contributor agreements, but I think there's a reason, and
you might not like it.

Regards

Antoine.



From guido at python.org  Wed Mar  9 14:30:40 2011
From: guido at python.org (Guido van Rossum)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 08:30:40 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
	Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <1299674540.3749.20.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>
	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTi=kBgGDGiQR=n07QDC7hVNb86ayGdb9_69aVV0o@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674540.3749.20.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimopA-C_F6v=aEKvwWWY_2e-VAkZntCghbs5cWs@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 7:42 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
>
>> > No, sorry, that doesn't parse.
>> > We don't need an explanation, we need a *solution*. Nobody cares about
>> > explanations when most online projects accept patches and enrole
>> > committers freely.
>>
>> While I agree with you that we need to do this better; don't interpret
>> what "other projects do" as "doing it right".
>
> They definitely do it right from a social perspective.

Another way of doing it right from a social perspective is to give
someone commit privileges even while they are still figuring out how
to send in their agreement via snail mail. It is enough for the pile
of agreements to be eventually consistent. Assuming you all trust the
new committer, there is no need for a transaction where the receipt of
the agreement must have  occurred before they can be given access to
the system -- as long as it's indicated that it can be withdrawn if
they don't send in the agreement.

In the mean time, yes, we need a web-based way of submitting
agreements. I believe I have already mentioned once before that Google
has a simple web form for individual contributors
(http://code.google.com/legal/individual-cla-v1.0.html) and only
requires a faxed signature for corporate contributors (where there are
actual lawyers on the contributing side).

-- 
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)

From guido at python.org  Wed Mar  9 14:45:15 2011
From: guido at python.org (Guido van Rossum)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 08:45:15 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
	Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <1299677748.3749.49.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>
	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTi=kBgGDGiQR=n07QDC7hVNb86ayGdb9_69aVV0o@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674540.3749.20.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTinZOOKkjADwOjP2noJrmjYZYu8dkaRAAm3Ms18_@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299675218.3749.26.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D777930.2050903@trueblade.com>
	<1299676063.3749.35.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<6499E317-4F23-4439-B8C6-04D071D360E1@holdenweb.com>
	<1299677748.3749.49.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=e6+WOrn_qdUhKcv-WXqAD+eSvtJ205O=o1sPJ@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 9, 2011 at 8:35 AM, Antoine Pitrou <solipsis at pitrou.net> wrote:
>
> Hello Steve,
>
>> > I don't care and don't want to argue (I insist about this) about
>> > religions, be it christianism or intellectual property.
>> > If you think a legal rule is needed, please just *ensure it doesn't get
>> > in the way*. That's your job as a self-proclaimed "protector of IP
>> > rights", not mine.
>> >
>> As I have already pointed out in this thread, the PSF is not a
>> "self-proclaimed" anything. It was established by Guido precisely to
>> ensure that the IP was unencumbered. So Guido clearly thinks the rule
>> is needed.
>
> I would like to hear Guido's opinion today about this. Python's
> development is not the same as it was 10 years ago, and the world has
> changed too.

If anything, we need the forms more than 10 years ago. BUT unlike then
it's acceptable to fill out a web form.

>> I think Jesse has pointed us to some very satisfactory potential
>> solutions. I also think you are making a mountain out of a molehill.
>
> The reason I am making a mountain out of a slightly oversized molehill
> is that otherwise it seems people here don't care to solve the issue,
> and instead keep patronizing about how the current process is fine
> (which it is!... as long as it isn't actually applied...).
>
>> Electronic forms are easier to deal with, but I seriously doubt their
>> absence has lost as much development effort as the total collective
>> developer time already expended on this thread :-)
>
> Well, I agree that not so much development effort has been lost because
> of us checking contributor agreements, but I think there's a reason, and
> you might not like it.

TBH I don't think that the implementation of the web form ought to be
the PSF directors' job. However approval of this change in process and
of the exact legal text that people agree to on the web form is. One
of the developers or some other volunteer can do the implementation --
just don't make it live until the PSF's lawyer has approved the text.
(Though if it was me I'd just copy the Google forms, scratch out
Google, and write in Python in crayon.) Please do record which version
of the form is agreed to.

As a temporary solution for new contributors, if you trust them, give
them their permissions and ask them to fill the paperwork later (soon,
but not as a condition for the permissions).

-- 
--Guido van Rossum (python.org/~guido)

From mal at egenix.com  Wed Mar  9 16:18:46 2011
From: mal at egenix.com (M.-A. Lemburg)
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 16:18:46 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights
 for	Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTinSXdJCVuppUwyXENOE6Rrg5nNaqvXbjNLE80rv@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>	<1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<AANLkTi=kBgGDGiQR=n07QDC7hVNb86ayGdb9_69aVV0o@mail.gmail.com>	<1299674540.3749.20.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<AANLkTinZOOKkjADwOjP2noJrmjYZYu8dkaRAAm3Ms18_@mail.gmail.com>	<1299675218.3749.26.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTinSXdJCVuppUwyXENOE6Rrg5nNaqvXbjNLE80rv@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D779A56.9020205@egenix.com>

I really don't understand what all the fuzz is about. We have
a two step process:

* Step 1

What the PSF initially needs is an acknowledgement of the
contributor (committer or not) that he or she is willing to
accept and enter into the agreement.

This can be done by checking a checkbox on the bug tracker,
a comment on the tracker, an inline note in the patch,
an emailed form, via IRC, etc.

The only important aspect in this step is to make the contributor
aware of the requirement and get his/her agreement to follow
up on it.

* Step 2

The paperwork can then be done as second step - in whatever
way is legally needed.

The only important aspect with this second step is that
the PSF does get to know about the new contribution. Since
Pat is not following the checkins list, an email to her
would be nice.

* Possible issues and solutions

If anything, I believe it's the legal form we require that's
giving people second thoughts, not finding a fax machine or
post box :-)

   http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/

Or perhaps, they are not aware of the requirement at all,
since the tracker doesn't mention it on the submission page:

   http://bugs.python.org/issue?@template=item

A simple note like this on the tracker would go a long way:

"""
Please be aware that we can only accept patches for Python
if you are willing to sign a contributor agreement with
the PSF (linked to the contrib forms).

The agreement is necessary in order for the PSF to be able
to legally distribute your contribution together with the
Python distribution. If you have questions, please write to
contributor-agreement at python.org.
"""

contributor-agreement at python.org could be aliased to
psf at python.org, pat at python.org, or even better, a
PSF committee taking care of this business.

For new core committers, I believe that step 1 and 2 ought
to really already have happened long before they even become
core committers. After all, submitting code is one of the
more important requirements we have for them, right ?

-- 
Marc-Andre Lemburg
eGenix.com

Professional Python Services directly from the Source  (#1, Mar 09 2011)
>>> Python/Zope Consulting and Support ...        http://www.egenix.com/
>>> mxODBC.Zope.Database.Adapter ...             http://zope.egenix.com/
>>> mxODBC, mxDateTime, mxTextTools ...        http://python.egenix.com/
________________________________________________________________________

::: Try our new mxODBC.Connect Python Database Interface for free ! ::::


   eGenix.com Software, Skills and Services GmbH  Pastor-Loeh-Str.48
    D-40764 Langenfeld, Germany. CEO Dipl.-Math. Marc-Andre Lemburg
           Registered at Amtsgericht Duesseldorf: HRB 46611
               http://www.egenix.com/company/contact/

From steve at holdenweb.com  Wed Mar  9 17:39:52 2011
From: steve at holdenweb.com (Steve Holden)
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2011 11:39:52 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights
	for	Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <4D779A56.9020205@egenix.com>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>	<1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<AANLkTi=kBgGDGiQR=n07QDC7hVNb86ayGdb9_69aVV0o@mail.gmail.com>	<1299674540.3749.20.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<AANLkTinZOOKkjADwOjP2noJrmjYZYu8dkaRAAm3Ms18_@mail.gmail.com>	<1299675218.3749.26.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTinSXdJCVuppUwyXENOE6Rrg5nNaqvXbjNLE80rv@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D779A56.9020205@egenix.com>
Message-ID: <7995B103-2682-46F3-8731-CC7C89ED123E@holdenweb.com>

On Mar 9, 2011, at 10:18 AM, M.-A. Lemburg wrote:

> contributor-agreement at python.org could be aliased to
> psf at python.org, pat at python.org, or even better, a
> PSF committee taking care of this business.

Lest this strike fear into the hearts of members I would point out that it would operate much like the Trademarks Committee, which never meets, but handles inquiries about the use of PSF trademarks (yes, not everyone agrees with trademarks, but if you have to have them then there has to be a legal owner) by email and responds to requests without reference to the Board.

Effectively this would give people who understand the agreement the opportunity to assist those who don't.

regards
 Steve


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20110309/96cbd2ae/attachment.html>

From jcea at jcea.es  Thu Mar 10 01:50:21 2011
From: jcea at jcea.es (Jesus Cea)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 01:50:21 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
 Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <1299677748.3749.49.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>	<1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<AANLkTi=kBgGDGiQR=n07QDC7hVNb86ayGdb9_69aVV0o@mail.gmail.com>	<1299674540.3749.20.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<AANLkTinZOOKkjADwOjP2noJrmjYZYu8dkaRAAm3Ms18_@mail.gmail.com>	<1299675218.3749.26.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<4D777930.2050903@trueblade.com>	<1299676063.3749.35.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<6499E317-4F23-4439-B8C6-04D071D360E1@holdenweb.com>
	<1299677748.3749.49.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <4D78204D.1030906@jcea.es>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 09/03/11 14:35, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
> Well, I agree that not so much development effort has been lost because
> of us checking contributor agreements, but I think there's a reason, and
> you might not like it.

I sent my signature in 2008 (I faxed it to USA). Some time after,
somebody asked me to send it again, because they couldn't find it
anymore (they got it initially, because I got my commit privileges).

So, somebody lost it, and somebody found it was missing and ask for it
again. So, somebody was paying attention and investing time being sure
everything is ok.

That said, I have used the same PGP key for 15 years. Would be nice if a
digital signature would be enough. I am probably an exception, nevertheless.


- -- 
Jesus Cea Avion                         _/_/      _/_/_/        _/_/_/
jcea at jcea.es - http://www.jcea.es/     _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
jabber / xmpp:jcea at jabber.org         _/_/    _/_/          _/_/_/_/_/
.                              _/_/  _/_/    _/_/          _/_/  _/_/
"Things are not so easy"      _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
"My name is Dump, Core Dump"   _/_/_/        _/_/_/      _/_/  _/_/
"El amor es poner tu felicidad en la felicidad de otro" - Leibniz
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQCVAwUBTXggTZlgi5GaxT1NAQJHOAP+MBRI75AlVzBk+r27qGIE4H2+4xXp9RnX
655MESIJkn5SflWaKLoRZWPYFzPsnm4spAzcFgwD2pcKjzTjSS7N+UOaJ8eDCrxf
K1bs/E4k5BI/1gYFXDK6e7MKLQnO7ySZX/3hvC/L945odIf+asz6cMkor85bScV6
6jgbv0r/bx4=
=x29g
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

From martin at v.loewis.de  Thu Mar 10 04:28:26 2011
From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?UTF-8?B?Ik1hcnRpbiB2LiBMw7Z3aXMi?=)
Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2011 22:28:26 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
 Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <4D78455A.1090000@v.loewis.de>

 > We don't need an explanation, we need a *solution*.

Please speak for yourself only. Is it just you being upset to
have to use paper, or is Ross Lagerwall actively refusing to
put his signature on a piece of paper?

Regards,
Martin

From steve at holdenweb.com  Thu Mar 10 06:45:09 2011
From: steve at holdenweb.com (Steve Holden)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 00:45:09 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
	Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <4D78455A.1090000@v.loewis.de>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D78455A.1090000@v.loewis.de>
Message-ID: <727C3298-20CB-45F9-B443-86284250F604@holdenweb.com>


On Mar 9, 2011, at 10:28 PM, Martin v. L?wis wrote:

> > We don't need an explanation, we need a *solution*.
> 
> Please speak for yourself only. Is it just you being upset to
> have to use paper, or is Ross Lagerwall actively refusing to
> put his signature on a piece of paper?
> 
Because Antoine is not entitled to include you in his "we" does not entitle you to put him in the singular. I doubt he is the only member who finds it difficult to understand why we are still using paper. It's not exactly trailblazing, is it?

regards
 Steve



From martin at v.loewis.de  Thu Mar 10 11:46:45 2011
From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 05:46:45 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
 Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <727C3298-20CB-45F9-B443-86284250F604@holdenweb.com>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D78455A.1090000@v.loewis.de>
	<727C3298-20CB-45F9-B443-86284250F604@holdenweb.com>
Message-ID: <4D78AC15.8050002@v.loewis.de>

Am 10.03.11 00:45, schrieb Steve Holden:
>
> On Mar 9, 2011, at 10:28 PM, Martin v. L?wis wrote:
>
>>> We don't need an explanation, we need a *solution*.
>>
>> Please speak for yourself only. Is it just you being upset to have
>> to use paper, or is Ross Lagerwall actively refusing to put his
>> signature on a piece of paper?
>>
> Because Antoine is not entitled to include you in his "we" does not
> entitle you to put him in the singular. I doubt he is the only member
> who finds it difficult to understand why we are still using paper.

I'd still like to understand whether this issue actually blocks the
case at hand. Antoine originally wrote

 > 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.

So the next logical step would be to ask him. If Ross said that
he did send the form, that would be good enough for me to proceed.
That would also be a *solution*.

Regards,
Martin

From kbk at shore.net  Thu Mar 10 14:25:32 2011
From: kbk at shore.net (Kurt B. Kaiser)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 08:25:32 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] Contirbutor Agreements
In-Reply-To: <4D78AC15.8050002@v.loewis.de>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>
	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com><1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain><4D78455A.1090000@v.loewis.de><727C3298-20CB-45F9-B443-86284250F604@holdenweb.com>
	<4D78AC15.8050002@v.loewis.de>
Message-ID: <1299763532.22079.1428243225@webmail.messagingengine.com>

We received a contributor agreement from Boris Feld, Belfort, France by
postal mail.

I will send it by postal mail to our Administrator.

I have not seen an agreement from Ross.  If he sent one, I'd suggest he
re-send it by attaching a scan to an email, given that it appears time
is pressing.  The Feld agreement took several weeks to wend its way to
me.

KBK

On Thu, 10 Mar 2011 05:46 -0500, " Martin v. L?wis "
<martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:
> Am 10.03.11 00:45, schrieb Steve Holden:
> >
> > On Mar 9, 2011, at 10:28 PM, Martin v. L?wis wrote:
> >
> >>> We don't need an explanation, we need a *solution*.
> >>
> >> Please speak for yourself only. Is it just you being upset to have
> >> to use paper, or is Ross Lagerwall actively refusing to put his
> >> signature on a piece of paper?
> >>
> > Because Antoine is not entitled to include you in his "we" does not
> > entitle you to put him in the singular. I doubt he is the only member
> > who finds it difficult to understand why we are still using paper.
> 
> I'd still like to understand whether this issue actually blocks the
> case at hand. Antoine originally wrote
> 
>  > 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.
> 
> So the next logical step would be to ask him. If Ross said that
> he did send the form, that would be good enough for me to proceed.
> That would also be a *solution*.
> 
> Regards,
> Martin
> _______________________________________________
> python-committers mailing list
> python-committers at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
> 

From solipsis at pitrou.net  Thu Mar 10 16:04:10 2011
From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 16:04:10 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
 Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <4D78AC15.8050002@v.loewis.de>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>
	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D78455A.1090000@v.loewis.de>
	<727C3298-20CB-45F9-B443-86284250F604@holdenweb.com>
	<4D78AC15.8050002@v.loewis.de>
Message-ID: <1299769450.3808.6.camel@localhost.localdomain>


>  > 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.
> 
> So the next logical step would be to ask him. If Ross said that
> he did send the form, that would be good enough for me to proceed.
> That would also be a *solution*.

Martin, why don't you implement your solution yourself, if you think the
process is not a problem? That would be a good way of putting money
where your mouth is.

I'm obviously not going to do that work for you. I'm not paid by the PSF
to solve paperwork.




From martin at v.loewis.de  Thu Mar 10 17:25:19 2011
From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?UTF-8?B?Ik1hcnRpbiB2LiBMw7Z3aXMi?=)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 11:25:19 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
 Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <1299769450.3808.6.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>	
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>	
	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>	
	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>	
	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>	
	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>	
	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>	
	<1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>	
	<4D78455A.1090000@v.loewis.de>	
	<727C3298-20CB-45F9-B443-86284250F604@holdenweb.com>	
	<4D78AC15.8050002@v.loewis.de>
	<1299769450.3808.6.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <4D78FB6F.2050104@v.loewis.de>

>> So the next logical step would be to ask him. If Ross said that
>> he did send the form, that would be good enough for me to proceed.
>> That would also be a *solution*.
>
> Martin, why don't you implement your solution yourself, if you think the
> process is not a problem? That would be a good way of putting money
> where your mouth is.
>
> I'm obviously not going to do that work for you. I'm not paid by the PSF
> to solve paperwork.

Just for the record: neither am I. However, sending an email to Ross 
wasn't that difficult.

Regards,
Martin

From solipsis at pitrou.net  Thu Mar 10 17:43:50 2011
From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 17:43:50 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
 Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <4D78FB6F.2050104@v.loewis.de>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>
	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D78455A.1090000@v.loewis.de>
	<727C3298-20CB-45F9-B443-86284250F604@holdenweb.com>
	<4D78AC15.8050002@v.loewis.de>
	<1299769450.3808.6.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D78FB6F.2050104@v.loewis.de>
Message-ID: <1299775430.3808.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>

Le jeudi 10 mars 2011 ? 11:25 -0500, "Martin v. L?wis" a ?crit :
> >> So the next logical step would be to ask him. If Ross said that
> >> he did send the form, that would be good enough for me to proceed.
> >> That would also be a *solution*.
> >
> > Martin, why don't you implement your solution yourself, if you think the
> > process is not a problem? That would be a good way of putting money
> > where your mouth is.
> >
> > I'm obviously not going to do that work for you. I'm not paid by the PSF
> > to solve paperwork.
> 
> Just for the record: neither am I. However, sending an email to Ross 
> wasn't that difficult.

Right, sending a mail isn't difficult. Do you volunteer to do the
necessary work (sending emails, following up on them, etc.) each and
every time the need for requesting and checking contributor agreements
arises?

Thank you

Antoine.



From steve at holdenweb.com  Thu Mar 10 17:54:43 2011
From: steve at holdenweb.com (Steve Holden)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 11:54:43 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
	Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <1299775430.3808.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>
	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D78455A.1090000@v.loewis.de>
	<727C3298-20CB-45F9-B443-86284250F604@holdenweb.com>
	<4D78AC15.8050002@v.loewis.de>
	<1299769450.3808.6.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D78FB6F.2050104@v.loewis.de>
	<1299775430.3808.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Message-ID: <29ECAE2F-505D-4AB0-85DF-74BAC211FB8F@holdenweb.com>

On Mar 10, 2011, at 11:43 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:

> Le jeudi 10 mars 2011 ? 11:25 -0500, "Martin v. L?wis" a ?crit :
>>>> So the next logical step would be to ask him. If Ross said that
>>>> he did send the form, that would be good enough for me to proceed.
>>>> That would also be a *solution*.
>>> 
>>> Martin, why don't you implement your solution yourself, if you think the
>>> process is not a problem? That would be a good way of putting money
>>> where your mouth is.
>>> 
>>> I'm obviously not going to do that work for you. I'm not paid by the PSF
>>> to solve paperwork.
>> 
>> Just for the record: neither am I. However, sending an email to Ross 
>> wasn't that difficult.
> 
> Right, sending a mail isn't difficult. Do you volunteer to do the
> necessary work (sending emails, following up on them, etc.) each and
> every time the need for requesting and checking contributor agreements
> arises?
> 
> Thank you

Antoine:

Your point will be more effectively made without this continual sniping at anyone who responds to you. That wasn't intended as a serious question, was it? UYou know Martin won't have time to do that.

As a matter of fact, though, the PSF has an administrator who is perfectly capable of doing just this if it's the best process we have, she just hasn't been involved in processing new developers in the past. So Pat should probably get involved in defining what the process is.

Let's work towards a solution, please.

regards
 Steve


From jnoller at gmail.com  Thu Mar 10 18:00:04 2011
From: jnoller at gmail.com (Jesse Noller)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 12:00:04 -0500
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
	Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <29ECAE2F-505D-4AB0-85DF-74BAC211FB8F@holdenweb.com>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>
	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D78455A.1090000@v.loewis.de>
	<727C3298-20CB-45F9-B443-86284250F604@holdenweb.com>
	<4D78AC15.8050002@v.loewis.de>
	<1299769450.3808.6.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D78FB6F.2050104@v.loewis.de>
	<1299775430.3808.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<29ECAE2F-505D-4AB0-85DF-74BAC211FB8F@holdenweb.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikSnwX9nzetbvFNqvnEJ5N82hvbmqu1tzpmT7YR@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Mar 10, 2011 at 11:54 AM, Steve Holden <steve at holdenweb.com> wrote:
> On Mar 10, 2011, at 11:43 AM, Antoine Pitrou wrote:
>
>> Le jeudi 10 mars 2011 ? 11:25 -0500, "Martin v. L?wis" a ?crit :
>>>>> So the next logical step would be to ask him. If Ross said that
>>>>> he did send the form, that would be good enough for me to proceed.
>>>>> That would also be a *solution*.
>>>>
>>>> Martin, why don't you implement your solution yourself, if you think the
>>>> process is not a problem? That would be a good way of putting money
>>>> where your mouth is.
>>>>
>>>> I'm obviously not going to do that work for you. I'm not paid by the PSF
>>>> to solve paperwork.
>>>
>>> Just for the record: neither am I. However, sending an email to Ross
>>> wasn't that difficult.
>>
>> Right, sending a mail isn't difficult. Do you volunteer to do the
>> necessary work (sending emails, following up on them, etc.) each and
>> every time the need for requesting and checking contributor agreements
>> arises?
>>
>> Thank you
>
> Antoine:
>
> Your point will be more effectively made without this continual sniping at anyone who responds to you. That wasn't intended as a serious question, was it? UYou know Martin won't have time to do that.
>
> As a matter of fact, though, the PSF has an administrator who is perfectly capable of doing just this if it's the best process we have, she just hasn't been involved in processing new developers in the past. So Pat should probably get involved in defining what the process is.
>
> Let's work towards a solution, please.
>
> regards
> ?Steve

I have spoken to Van Lindberg, and he and I will be driving/discussing
the best approach for electronic CLAs/signing. We will drive this on a
PSF level.

From solipsis at pitrou.net  Thu Mar 10 18:04:31 2011
From: solipsis at pitrou.net (Antoine Pitrou)
Date: Thu, 10 Mar 2011 18:04:31 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] [PSF-Members] [Fwd: Re: Push rights for
 Ross Lagerwall]
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikSnwX9nzetbvFNqvnEJ5N82hvbmqu1tzpmT7YR@mail.gmail.com>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com>
	<1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com>
	<1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com>
	<1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D78455A.1090000@v.loewis.de>
	<727C3298-20CB-45F9-B443-86284250F604@holdenweb.com>
	<4D78AC15.8050002@v.loewis.de>
	<1299769450.3808.6.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<4D78FB6F.2050104@v.loewis.de>
	<1299775430.3808.18.camel@localhost.localdomain>
	<29ECAE2F-505D-4AB0-85DF-74BAC211FB8F@holdenweb.com>
	<AANLkTikSnwX9nzetbvFNqvnEJ5N82hvbmqu1tzpmT7YR@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <1299776671.3808.24.camel@localhost.localdomain>

Le jeudi 10 mars 2011 ? 12:00 -0500, Jesse Noller a ?crit :
> I have spoken to Van Lindberg, and he and I will be driving/discussing
> the best approach for electronic CLAs/signing. We will drive this on a
> PSF level.

Thank you!



From kbk at shore.net  Sun Mar 13 13:46:23 2011
From: kbk at shore.net (Kurt B. Kaiser)
Date: Sun, 13 Mar 2011 08:46:23 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Contirbutor Agreements
In-Reply-To: <1299763532.22079.1428243225@webmail.messagingengine.com>
References: <1299669627.3749.3.camel@localhost.localdomain><4D7765DC.6040803@egenix.com><1299671172.3749.8.camel@localhost.localdomain><87F39B2E-07F5-480C-B3CC-5E8F9FCD8041@holdenweb.com><1299672247.3749.11.camel@localhost.localdomain><AANLkTikhbiS5fV1Pi6Qcz+3EihtKsP55s6pKTNH4hoMf@mail.gmail.com><AANLkTikzvYpT72b43PPACgHB4LQ5F5VNy1RY9vumaM7T@mail.gmail.com><1299674270.3749.18.camel@localhost.localdomain><4D78455A.1090000@v.loewis.de><727C3298-20CB-45F9-B443-86284250F604@holdenweb.com><4D78AC15.8050002@v.loewis.de>
	<1299763532.22079.1428243225@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Message-ID: <1300020383.23963.1429202129@webmail.messagingengine.com>

We have now received a contributor agreement by fax from Ross Lagerwall.

KBK

On Thu, 10 Mar 2011 08:25 -0500, "Kurt B. Kaitorser" <kbk at shore.net>
wrote:
> We received a contributor agreement from Boris Feld, Belfort, France by
> postal mail.
> 
> I will send it by postal mail to our Administrator.
> 
> I have not seen an agreement from Ross.  If he sent one, I'd suggest he
> re-send it by attaching a scan to an email, given that it appears time
> is pressing.  The Feld agreement took several weeks to wend its way to
> me.
> 
> KBK
> 
> On Thu, 10 Mar 2011 05:46 -0500, " Martin v. L?wis "
> <martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:
> > Am 10.03.11 00:45, schrieb Steve Holden:
> > >
> > > On Mar 9, 2011, at 10:28 PM, Martin v. L?wis wrote:
> > >
> > >>> We don't need an explanation, we need a *solution*.
> > >>
> > >> Please speak for yourself only. Is it just you being upset to have
> > >> to use paper, or is Ross Lagerwall actively refusing to put his
> > >> signature on a piece of paper?
> > >>
> > > Because Antoine is not entitled to include you in his "we" does not
> > > entitle you to put him in the singular. I doubt he is the only member
> > > who finds it difficult to understand why we are still using paper.
> > 
> > I'd still like to understand whether this issue actually blocks the
> > case at hand. Antoine originally wrote
> > 
> >  > 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.
> > 
> > So the next logical step would be to ask him. If Ross said that
> > he did send the form, that would be good enough for me to proceed.
> > That would also be a *solution*.
> > 
> > Regards,
> > Martin
> > _______________________________________________
> > python-committers mailing list
> > python-committers at python.org
> > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
> > 
> _______________________________________________
> python-committers mailing list
> python-committers at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
> 
-- 
KBK


From martin at v.loewis.de  Wed Mar 16 04:22:19 2011
From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?ISO-8859-15?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=)
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 23:22:19 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Recording committer status in the bug tracker
Message-ID: <4D802CEB.5060204@v.loewis.de>

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

From alex.gaynor at gmail.com  Wed Mar 16 04:45:27 2011
From: alex.gaynor at gmail.com (Alex Gaynor)
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2011 23:45:27 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Recording committer status in the bug
	tracker
In-Reply-To: <4D802CEB.5060204@v.loewis.de>
References: <4D802CEB.5060204@v.loewis.de>
Message-ID: <AANLkTimRrz9FTZs9ESsToysGFEgvbWZBWyCCKEJ39LZ+@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 11:22 PM, "Martin v. L?wis" <martin at v.loewis.de>wrote:

> 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
> _______________________________________________
> python-committers mailing list
> python-committers at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
>

I'm not showing as a committer (also not showing as CLA received, but I
suppose that's different).

Alex

-- 
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to
say it." -- Evelyn Beatrice Hall (summarizing Voltaire)
"The people's good is the highest law." -- Cicero
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20110315/312a67c9/attachment.html>

From fdrake at acm.org  Wed Mar 16 05:09:34 2011
From: fdrake at acm.org (Fred Drake)
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 00:09:34 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Recording committer status in the bug
	tracker
In-Reply-To: <4D802CEB.5060204@v.loewis.de>
References: <4D802CEB.5060204@v.loewis.de>
Message-ID: <AANLkTikne9x5wxurNKYHAYshx=va_=QuFkmLn6kmdJBX@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 11:22 PM, "Martin v. L?wis" <martin at v.loewis.de> wrote:
> added a boolean flag to the bug tracker indicating what user accounts belong
> to committers.

I'm showing as a committer, but not that my contributor form has been
received.  I've pointed out the later problem before (some time ago),
and there was no response.  I know I've provided one.

If someone could check on that, I'd appreciate it.  If I need to
submit a new form, I can do that as well.


? -Fred

--
Fred L. Drake, Jr.? ? <fdrake at acm.org>
"A storm broke loose in my mind."? --Albert Einstein

From martin at v.loewis.de  Wed Mar 16 05:11:44 2011
From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?UTF-8?B?Ik1hcnRpbiB2LiBMw7Z3aXMi?=)
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 00:11:44 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Recording committer status in the bug
	tracker
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimRrz9FTZs9ESsToysGFEgvbWZBWyCCKEJ39LZ+@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4D802CEB.5060204@v.loewis.de>
	<AANLkTimRrz9FTZs9ESsToysGFEgvbWZBWyCCKEJ39LZ+@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D803880.4000701@v.loewis.de>


> I'm not showing as a committer (also not showing as CLA received, but I
> suppose that's different).

I couldn't find you at first since you didn't put your last name into 
the tracker. I have fixed that as well now.

As for the CLA - this is a known issue; this isn't getting updated 
regularly.

Regards,
Martin

From eliben at gmail.com  Wed Mar 16 05:18:55 2011
From: eliben at gmail.com (Eli Bendersky)
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 06:18:55 +0200
Subject: [python-committers] Recording committer status in the bug
	tracker
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTikne9x5wxurNKYHAYshx=va_=QuFkmLn6kmdJBX@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4D802CEB.5060204@v.loewis.de>
	<AANLkTikne9x5wxurNKYHAYshx=va_=QuFkmLn6kmdJBX@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=HFW3Dzr=tO=VGPvG5YYRXQ=5sf7p4RAp-rJ4+@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 06:09, Fred Drake <fdrake at acm.org> wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 11:22 PM, "Martin v. L?wis" <martin at v.loewis.de>
> wrote:
> > added a boolean flag to the bug tracker indicating what user accounts
> belong
> > to committers.
>
> I'm showing as a committer, but not that my contributor form has been
> received.  I've pointed out the later problem before (some time ago),
> and there was no response.  I know I've provided one.
>

Same here. I have a confirmation email from Kurt Kaiser (Jan 27th 2011) that
my contributor agreement was received.
Eli
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20110316/205bee6f/attachment.html>

From tjreedy at udel.edu  Wed Mar 16 07:05:57 2011
From: tjreedy at udel.edu (Terry Reedy)
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 02:05:57 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Recording committer status in the
	bug	tracker
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=HFW3Dzr=tO=VGPvG5YYRXQ=5sf7p4RAp-rJ4+@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4D802CEB.5060204@v.loewis.de>
	<AANLkTikne9x5wxurNKYHAYshx=va_=QuFkmLn6kmdJBX@mail.gmail.com>
	<AANLkTi=HFW3Dzr=tO=VGPvG5YYRXQ=5sf7p4RAp-rJ4+@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <4D805345.1000403@udel.edu>



On 3/16/2011 12:18 AM, Eli Bendersky wrote:
>
> On Wed, Mar 16, 2011 at 06:09, Fred Drake <fdrake at acm.org
> <mailto:fdrake at acm.org>> wrote:
>
>     On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 11:22 PM, "Martin v. L?wis"
>     <martin at v.loewis.de <mailto:martin at v.loewis.de>> wrote:
>      > added a boolean flag to the bug tracker indicating what user
>     accounts belong
>      > to committers.
>
>     I'm showing as a committer, but not that my contributor form has been
>     received.  I've pointed out the later problem before (some time ago),
>     and there was no response.  I know I've provided one.
>
>
> Same here. I have a confirmation email from Kurt Kaiser (Jan 27th 2011)
> that my contributor agreement was received.
> Eli

Ditto, except that contributor form was a few years ago I believe. I 
don't think info has been properly transferred to tracker.


From steve at holdenweb.com  Wed Mar 16 11:14:42 2011
From: steve at holdenweb.com (Steve Holden)
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 06:14:42 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Recording committer status in the bug
	tracker
In-Reply-To: <4D803880.4000701@v.loewis.de>
References: <4D802CEB.5060204@v.loewis.de>
	<AANLkTimRrz9FTZs9ESsToysGFEgvbWZBWyCCKEJ39LZ+@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D803880.4000701@v.loewis.de>
Message-ID: <097F6B2B-EBC3-4B18-9E1F-F0A980E43D47@holdenweb.com>


On Mar 16, 2011, at 12:11 AM, Martin v. L?wis wrote:

> 
>> I'm not showing as a committer (also not showing as CLA received, but I
>> suppose that's different).
> 
> I couldn't find you at first since you didn't put your last name into the tracker. I have fixed that as well now.
> 
> As for the CLA - this is a known issue; this isn't getting updated regularly.
> 
Time it did, then. Anything the Foundation can do to help?

regards
 Steve


From martin at v.loewis.de  Wed Mar 16 13:49:40 2011
From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=)
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 08:49:40 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Recording committer status in the bug
	tracker
In-Reply-To: <097F6B2B-EBC3-4B18-9E1F-F0A980E43D47@holdenweb.com>
References: <4D802CEB.5060204@v.loewis.de>
	<AANLkTimRrz9FTZs9ESsToysGFEgvbWZBWyCCKEJ39LZ+@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D803880.4000701@v.loewis.de>
	<097F6B2B-EBC3-4B18-9E1F-F0A980E43D47@holdenweb.com>
Message-ID: <4D80B1E4.4070903@v.loewis.de>

>> As for the CLA - this is a known issue; this isn't getting updated regularly.
>>
> Time it did, then. Anything the Foundation can do to help?

AMK did once enter all known contrib forms into it, up to a certain 
point. The plan then was that Pat should keep it updated. That never
happened, I believe.

Regards,
Martin

From barry at python.org  Wed Mar 16 16:05:38 2011
From: barry at python.org (Barry Warsaw)
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 11:05:38 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Recording committer status in the bug
 tracker
In-Reply-To: <097F6B2B-EBC3-4B18-9E1F-F0A980E43D47@holdenweb.com>
References: <4D802CEB.5060204@v.loewis.de>
	<AANLkTimRrz9FTZs9ESsToysGFEgvbWZBWyCCKEJ39LZ+@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D803880.4000701@v.loewis.de>
	<097F6B2B-EBC3-4B18-9E1F-F0A980E43D47@holdenweb.com>
Message-ID: <20110316110538.6cbda18d@neurotica>

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
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20110316/01d57138/attachment.pgp>

From steve at holdenweb.com  Wed Mar 16 16:44:29 2011
From: steve at holdenweb.com (Steve Holden)
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 11:44:29 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Recording committer status in the bug
	tracker
In-Reply-To: <20110316110538.6cbda18d@neurotica>
References: <4D802CEB.5060204@v.loewis.de>
	<AANLkTimRrz9FTZs9ESsToysGFEgvbWZBWyCCKEJ39LZ+@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D803880.4000701@v.loewis.de>
	<097F6B2B-EBC3-4B18-9E1F-F0A980E43D47@holdenweb.com>
	<20110316110538.6cbda18d@neurotica>
Message-ID: <25DDECA2-1543-4205-AA1C-B81714CF007D@holdenweb.com>

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 at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers


From stutzbach at google.com  Wed Mar 16 18:32:24 2011
From: stutzbach at google.com (Daniel Stutzbach)
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 10:32:24 -0700
Subject: [python-committers] Recording committer status in the bug
	tracker
In-Reply-To: <4D802CEB.5060204@v.loewis.de>
References: <4D802CEB.5060204@v.loewis.de>
Message-ID: <AANLkTinTg2SCR=Ei=CDZNEqEqe-ApKu+Hxxp1Hcjr9cb@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Mar 15, 2011 at 8:22 PM, "Martin v. L?wis" <martin at v.loewis.de>wrote:

> 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.
>

For me, the area next to "Is Committer" is blank and "Contributor Form
Received" is no.

I handed in a Contributor Form during the sprints as PyCon 2007.  Although I
think now the copyright on my contributions are owned by Google and covered
by Google's agreement with the PSF.  However, I am not a lawyer. ;-)

-- 
Daniel Stutzbach
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20110316/727f5a66/attachment.html>

From steve at holdenweb.com  Wed Mar 16 20:40:53 2011
From: steve at holdenweb.com (Steve Holden)
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2011 15:40:53 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] Recording committer status in the bug
	tracker
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTimg7QDy3ScDn1UYcq2s76TRiyRtcSRowCtguPwh@mail.gmail.com>
References: <4D802CEB.5060204@v.loewis.de>
	<AANLkTimRrz9FTZs9ESsToysGFEgvbWZBWyCCKEJ39LZ+@mail.gmail.com>
	<4D803880.4000701@v.loewis.de>
	<097F6B2B-EBC3-4B18-9E1F-F0A980E43D47@holdenweb.com>
	<20110316110538.6cbda18d@neurotica>
	<25DDECA2-1543-4205-AA1C-B81714CF007D@holdenweb.com>
	<AANLkTimg7QDy3ScDn1UYcq2s76TRiyRtcSRowCtguPwh@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20D26E02-5272-4915-B6B3-296E783150F6@holdenweb.com>

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 at 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 at python.org
> > http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -- 
> Pat Campbell
> PSF Administrator/Secretary
> patcam at python.org
> <ContributorAgreements-'-09, '10, & '11.xls>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-committers/attachments/20110316/5c4accc5/attachment.html>

From g.brandl at gmx.net  Wed Mar 23 21:41:56 2011
From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl)
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 21:41:56 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] PEPs repo converted
Message-ID: <imdluc$u51$1@dough.gmane.org>

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


From victor.stinner at haypocalc.com  Thu Mar 24 02:31:47 2011
From: victor.stinner at haypocalc.com (Victor Stinner)
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 02:31:47 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] There are two versions of the Contributor
	Agreement
Message-ID: <1300930307.1028.31.camel@marge>

http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/contrib-form-python/
and
http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/contrib-form/

It looks like the first one is old, because
http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/ points to the second one.

Victor


From nad at acm.org  Thu Mar 24 02:35:13 2011
From: nad at acm.org (Ned Deily)
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 18:35:13 -0700
Subject: [python-committers] PEPs repo converted
References: <imdluc$u51$1@dough.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <nad-3EADD1.18351323032011@news.gmane.org>

In article <imdluc$u51$1 at dough.gmane.org>,
 Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:

> Please commit any PEP changes to hg.python.org/peps.

Looks like the Version and Last-Modified keywords formerly supplied by 
svn are now AWOL on the generated web pages.

-- 
 Ned Deily,
 nad at acm.org


From tjreedy at udel.edu  Thu Mar 24 03:41:57 2011
From: tjreedy at udel.edu (Terry Reedy)
Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2011 22:41:57 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] There are two versions of the Contributor
 Agreement
In-Reply-To: <1300930307.1028.31.camel@marge>
References: <1300930307.1028.31.camel@marge>
Message-ID: <4D8AAF75.1080609@udel.edu>



On 3/23/2011 9:31 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
> http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/contrib-form-python/
> and
> http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/contrib-form/
>
> It looks like the first one is old, because
> http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/ points to the second one.

I believe you are right. The only difference is the addition of the line 
'The currently acceptible licenses..." and a vaguely remember some 
discussion just before I signed it (the 2nd version with the addition).

From steve at holdenweb.com  Thu Mar 24 05:55:28 2011
From: steve at holdenweb.com (Steve Holden)
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 00:55:28 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] There are two versions of the Contributor
	Agreement
In-Reply-To: <4D8AAF75.1080609@udel.edu>
References: <1300930307.1028.31.camel@marge> <4D8AAF75.1080609@udel.edu>
Message-ID: <358ED9D3-E1DD-4962-A8CB-3E73DD27F4F7@holdenweb.com>

We should ask the pydotorg list to fix this. Should we at the same time requet the assition of a field for the committer's user name?

regards
 Steve

On Mar 23, 2011, at 10:41 PM, Terry Reedy wrote:

> 
> 
> On 3/23/2011 9:31 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
>> http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/contrib-form-python/
>> and
>> http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/contrib-form/
>> 
>> It looks like the first one is old, because
>> http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/ points to the second one.
> 
> I believe you are right. The only difference is the addition of the line 'The currently acceptible licenses..." and a vaguely remember some discussion just before I signed it (the 2nd version with the addition).
> _______________________________________________
> python-committers mailing list
> python-committers at python.org
> http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-committers


From g.brandl at gmx.net  Thu Mar 24 09:12:05 2011
From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl)
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 09:12:05 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] PEPs repo converted
In-Reply-To: <nad-3EADD1.18351323032011@news.gmane.org>
References: <imdluc$u51$1@dough.gmane.org>
	<nad-3EADD1.18351323032011@news.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <imeucl$stg$1@dough.gmane.org>

On 24.03.2011 02:35, Ned Deily wrote:
> In article <imdluc$u51$1 at dough.gmane.org>,
>  Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:
> 
>> Please commit any PEP changes to hg.python.org/peps.
> 
> Looks like the Version and Last-Modified keywords formerly supplied by 
> svn are now AWOL on the generated web pages.

Thanks, I've fixed that now (by locally enabling the keyword
extension).

Georg




From mal at egenix.com  Thu Mar 24 09:40:44 2011
From: mal at egenix.com (M.-A. Lemburg)
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 09:40:44 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] There are two versions of the Contributor
 Agreement
In-Reply-To: <4D8AAF75.1080609@udel.edu>
References: <1300930307.1028.31.camel@marge> <4D8AAF75.1080609@udel.edu>
Message-ID: <4D8B038C.10408@egenix.com>

Terry Reedy wrote:
> 
> 
> On 3/23/2011 9:31 PM, Victor Stinner wrote:
>> http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/contrib-form-python/
>> and
>> http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/contrib-form/
>>
>> It looks like the first one is old, because
>> http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/ points to the second one.
> 
> I believe you are right. The only difference is the addition of the line
> 'The currently acceptible licenses..." and a vaguely remember some
> discussion just before I signed it (the 2nd version with the addition).

The first one is old and was mainly used when we started to
ask for CLAs. It optionally also covers past contributions.

The second one is the one we currently use. It does not
have the clause to cover past contributions, since we now
expect contributors to sign the CLA before the contributions
go into the repository.

Could someone please arrange for the first URL to redirect to the
second one ?

Thanks,
-- 
Marc-Andre Lemburg
eGenix.com

Professional Python Services directly from the Source  (#1, Mar 24 2011)
>>> Python/Zope Consulting and Support ...        http://www.egenix.com/
>>> mxODBC.Zope.Database.Adapter ...             http://zope.egenix.com/
>>> mxODBC, mxDateTime, mxTextTools ...        http://python.egenix.com/
________________________________________________________________________

::: Try our new mxODBC.Connect Python Database Interface for free ! ::::


   eGenix.com Software, Skills and Services GmbH  Pastor-Loeh-Str.48
    D-40764 Langenfeld, Germany. CEO Dipl.-Math. Marc-Andre Lemburg
           Registered at Amtsgericht Duesseldorf: HRB 46611
               http://www.egenix.com/company/contact/

From rdmurray at bitdance.com  Thu Mar 24 13:18:50 2011
From: rdmurray at bitdance.com (R. David Murray)
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 08:18:50 -0400
Subject: [python-committers] There are two versions of the Contributor
	Agreement
In-Reply-To: <4D8B038C.10408@egenix.com>
References: <1300930307.1028.31.camel@marge> <4D8AAF75.1080609@udel.edu>
	<4D8B038C.10408@egenix.com>
Message-ID: <20110324121850.D815FF4A1B@kimball.webabinitio.net>

On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 09:40:44 +0100, "M.-A. Lemburg" <mal at egenix.com> wrote:
> The second one is the one we currently use. It does not
> have the clause to cover past contributions, since we now
> expect contributors to sign the CLA before the contributions
> go into the repository.

Note that this rarely happens in practice.  At least, it rarely happens
that the PSF has the form in hand and acknowledged prior to the first
significant checkin.

--
R. David Murray           http://www.bitdance.com

From mal at egenix.com  Thu Mar 24 14:29:26 2011
From: mal at egenix.com (M.-A. Lemburg)
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 14:29:26 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] There are two versions of the Contributor
 Agreement
In-Reply-To: <20110324121850.D815FF4A1B@kimball.webabinitio.net>
References: <1300930307.1028.31.camel@marge>
	<4D8AAF75.1080609@udel.edu>	<4D8B038C.10408@egenix.com>
	<20110324121850.D815FF4A1B@kimball.webabinitio.net>
Message-ID: <4D8B4736.4060006@egenix.com>

R. David Murray wrote:
> On Thu, 24 Mar 2011 09:40:44 +0100, "M.-A. Lemburg" <mal at egenix.com> wrote:
>> The second one is the one we currently use. It does not
>> have the clause to cover past contributions, since we now
>> expect contributors to sign the CLA before the contributions
>> go into the repository.
> 
> Note that this rarely happens in practice.  At least, it rarely happens
> that the PSF has the form in hand and acknowledged prior to the first
> significant checkin.

True and there's work underway to fix this.

I should have phrased the reply more carefully: while in the ideal
case, we should have the CLA before adding significant contributions
to the repo, it is fine if we only get it in time for a release
containing the contribution.

Also, given that we have for many years worked without any CLA,
let's not overrate all this. If a contributor uploads a patch to
the tracker, he or she will know that the patch could end up in the
repo and subsequent release - regardless of whether they sign a CLA or not.

Legally this is a gray area, though, which is why the PSF introduced
the CLA some years ago.

Note that the PSF may also get into trouble if such code was submitted
by someone who doesn't own the copyright to the patch. This has
happened a couple of times in the past (fortunately, before cutting
the release), so for larger contributions, it's better to double
check with the patch provider and get the CLA before adding the
code to the repo. The problem is then no longer a PSF problem,
but one of the patch provider.

-- 
Marc-Andre Lemburg
eGenix.com

Professional Python Services directly from the Source  (#1, Mar 24 2011)
>>> Python/Zope Consulting and Support ...        http://www.egenix.com/
>>> mxODBC.Zope.Database.Adapter ...             http://zope.egenix.com/
>>> mxODBC, mxDateTime, mxTextTools ...        http://python.egenix.com/
________________________________________________________________________

::: Try our new mxODBC.Connect Python Database Interface for free ! ::::


   eGenix.com Software, Skills and Services GmbH  Pastor-Loeh-Str.48
    D-40764 Langenfeld, Germany. CEO Dipl.-Math. Marc-Andre Lemburg
           Registered at Amtsgericht Duesseldorf: HRB 46611
               http://www.egenix.com/company/contact/

From jcea at jcea.es  Thu Mar 24 19:14:47 2011
From: jcea at jcea.es (Jesus Cea)
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 19:14:47 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] PEPs repo converted
In-Reply-To: <imeucl$stg$1@dough.gmane.org>
References: <imdluc$u51$1@dough.gmane.org>	<nad-3EADD1.18351323032011@news.gmane.org>
	<imeucl$stg$1@dough.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <4D8B8A17.6000605@jcea.es>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 24/03/11 09:12, Georg Brandl wrote:
> On 24.03.2011 02:35, Ned Deily wrote:
>> In article <imdluc$u51$1 at dough.gmane.org>,
>>  Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Please commit any PEP changes to hg.python.org/peps.
>>
>> Looks like the Version and Last-Modified keywords formerly supplied by 
>> svn are now AWOL on the generated web pages.
> 
> Thanks, I've fixed that now (by locally enabling the keyword
> extension).

These requirements (activate the keyword extension, and set it to
"**.txt" files) should be documented somewhere... :).

BTW, can I actually push to "hg.python.org/peps", as indicated?. I would
expect something like "ssh://hg at hg.python.org/peps".

- -- 
Jesus Cea Avion                         _/_/      _/_/_/        _/_/_/
jcea at jcea.es - http://www.jcea.es/     _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
jabber / xmpp:jcea at jabber.org         _/_/    _/_/          _/_/_/_/_/
.                              _/_/  _/_/    _/_/          _/_/  _/_/
"Things are not so easy"      _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
"My name is Dump, Core Dump"   _/_/_/        _/_/_/      _/_/  _/_/
"El amor es poner tu felicidad en la felicidad de otro" - Leibniz
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQCVAwUBTYuKF5lgi5GaxT1NAQKKtwP8DXMD02ocwHiHIJbnd2lr3bp8vbxx7HiF
yTrBKH6LdqyNUHgorcvXtL5lzcrwqcg/ppOVtODHolM48GMM3hX0A44SAqjMMYoO
YByRWmt5v/lOBaKfgW/mM2TEbDm7PeGkCh/zzBFVelA9fk2VNYZ1u8epb0lxFmwr
g2K2MPqqRfY=
=V7w3
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

From g.brandl at gmx.net  Thu Mar 24 22:29:08 2011
From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl)
Date: Thu, 24 Mar 2011 22:29:08 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] PEPs repo converted
In-Reply-To: <4D8B8A17.6000605@jcea.es>
References: <imdluc$u51$1@dough.gmane.org>	<nad-3EADD1.18351323032011@news.gmane.org>
	<imeucl$stg$1@dough.gmane.org> <4D8B8A17.6000605@jcea.es>
Message-ID: <imgd33$vo4$1@dough.gmane.org>

On 24.03.2011 19:14, Jesus Cea wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> On 24/03/11 09:12, Georg Brandl wrote:
>> On 24.03.2011 02:35, Ned Deily wrote:
>>> In article <imdluc$u51$1 at dough.gmane.org>,
>>>  Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Please commit any PEP changes to hg.python.org/peps.
>>>
>>> Looks like the Version and Last-Modified keywords formerly supplied by 
>>> svn are now AWOL on the generated web pages.
>> 
>> Thanks, I've fixed that now (by locally enabling the keyword
>> extension).
> 
> These requirements (activate the keyword extension, and set it to
> "**.txt" files) should be documented somewhere... :).

Well, I don't think it's required for anyone other than python.org.
Those who edit the PEPs just need to keep the $Revision$ and $Date$ intact.

> BTW, can I actually push to "hg.python.org/peps", as indicated?. I would
> expect something like "ssh://hg at hg.python.org/peps".

Yes, of course.

Georg


From jcea at jcea.es  Fri Mar 25 04:47:45 2011
From: jcea at jcea.es (Jesus Cea)
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 04:47:45 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] PEPs repo converted
In-Reply-To: <imgd33$vo4$1@dough.gmane.org>
References: <imdluc$u51$1@dough.gmane.org>	<nad-3EADD1.18351323032011@news.gmane.org>	<imeucl$stg$1@dough.gmane.org>
	<4D8B8A17.6000605@jcea.es> <imgd33$vo4$1@dough.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <4D8C1061.1020102@jcea.es>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 24/03/11 22:29, Georg Brandl wrote:
>> These requirements (activate the keyword extension, and set it to 
>> "**.txt" files) should be documented somewhere... :).
> 
> Well, I don't think it's required for anyone other than python.org. 
> Those who edit the PEPs just need to keep the $Revision$ and $Date$
> intact.

So, must I disable the extension KW again?. I am confused.

Maybe editors simply must keep "$Revision$" and "$Date$", since those
keywords are expanded in the server, for showing in docs.python.org?.

- -- 
Jesus Cea Avion                         _/_/      _/_/_/        _/_/_/
jcea at jcea.es - http://www.jcea.es/     _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
jabber / xmpp:jcea at jabber.org         _/_/    _/_/          _/_/_/_/_/
.                              _/_/  _/_/    _/_/          _/_/  _/_/
"Things are not so easy"      _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
"My name is Dump, Core Dump"   _/_/_/        _/_/_/      _/_/  _/_/
"El amor es poner tu felicidad en la felicidad de otro" - Leibniz
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQCVAwUBTYwQYZlgi5GaxT1NAQI5pgP/btNjHZnGu1lFgoWLPOnQfK1fM9glufyZ
YenlTJDlSXrieheam8SOUXMmNX/dgvjVxqfDvXmRFosoPIPZlEFDMTwPxyq99mVu
MihH8UYFVy87+9xngL7IiWctKMwAQRHZcuOZayqKBWqA9lSDOSD2s9e27L1Xyypm
xNpkX9lRIoo=
=VaPC
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

From jcea at jcea.es  Fri Mar 25 06:21:05 2011
From: jcea at jcea.es (Jesus Cea)
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 06:21:05 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] PEPs repo converted
In-Reply-To: <4D8C1061.1020102@jcea.es>
References: <imdluc$u51$1@dough.gmane.org>	<nad-3EADD1.18351323032011@news.gmane.org>	<imeucl$stg$1@dough.gmane.org>	<4D8B8A17.6000605@jcea.es>
	<imgd33$vo4$1@dough.gmane.org> <4D8C1061.1020102@jcea.es>
Message-ID: <4D8C2641.9010300@jcea.es>

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

PEP 0001 still lists SVN as the way to checkout/commit PEPs. I guess
that place would be the right place to document the details about
keywords & mercurial.

- -- 
Jesus Cea Avion                         _/_/      _/_/_/        _/_/_/
jcea at jcea.es - http://www.jcea.es/     _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
jabber / xmpp:jcea at jabber.org         _/_/    _/_/          _/_/_/_/_/
.                              _/_/  _/_/    _/_/          _/_/  _/_/
"Things are not so easy"      _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/    _/_/  _/_/
"My name is Dump, Core Dump"   _/_/_/        _/_/_/      _/_/  _/_/
"El amor es poner tu felicidad en la felicidad de otro" - Leibniz
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQCVAwUBTYwmQZlgi5GaxT1NAQJwRwP/Wnc4iYzYn+eD4fQ1gzipbrZO5DTs54Aa
iTugXjWCLN/jQ9EmJatRyMxcwT999dyY7r25vsFF17YvqH4CLbmHNbe2SxKmfQlO
KZ9wm9pR1TAXBnNskT+MhvdJJ0rwSjPC25z6nPWhZky6zDl8AzB/JyqquBiVIX1S
SK4dKh+EPIY=
=bKsT
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

From martin at v.loewis.de  Fri Mar 25 06:58:02 2011
From: martin at v.loewis.de (=?ISO-8859-1?Q?=22Martin_v=2E_L=F6wis=22?=)
Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2011 06:58:02 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] PEPs repo converted
In-Reply-To: <4D8C1061.1020102@jcea.es>
References: <imdluc$u51$1@dough.gmane.org>	<nad-3EADD1.18351323032011@news.gmane.org>	<imeucl$stg$1@dough.gmane.org>	<4D8B8A17.6000605@jcea.es>
	<imgd33$vo4$1@dough.gmane.org> <4D8C1061.1020102@jcea.es>
Message-ID: <4D8C2EEA.9070804@v.loewis.de>

Am 25.03.2011 04:47, schrieb Jesus Cea:
> On 24/03/11 22:29, Georg Brandl wrote:
>>> These requirements (activate the keyword extension, and set it to 
>>> "**.txt" files) should be documented somewhere... :).
> 
>> Well, I don't think it's required for anyone other than python.org. 
>> Those who edit the PEPs just need to keep the $Revision$ and $Date$
>> intact.
> 
> So, must I disable the extension KW again?. I am confused.

No. You may enable the extension, or you may disable it, just as you
like. It makes no difference.

> Maybe editors simply must keep "$Revision$" and "$Date$", since those
> keywords are expanded in the server, for showing in docs.python.org?.

Editors may add the keywords, or they may remove them, just as they
like. It does make a difference and is the choice of the editor.
In any case, the PEPs don't show up in docs.python.org (AFAIK), but
in http://www.python.org/dev/peps/.

Regards,
Martin

From ncoghlan at gmail.com  Sat Mar 26 05:01:02 2011
From: ncoghlan at gmail.com (Nick Coghlan)
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2011 14:01:02 +1000
Subject: [python-committers] PEPs repo converted
In-Reply-To: <imdluc$u51$1@dough.gmane.org>
References: <imdluc$u51$1@dough.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=euw-gnYWnR9eE1UPaHvgNnvX0=k-RXzdiZ=dQ@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 6:41 AM, Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:
> 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 :)

With the quick and easy svn:external reference to docutils gone, could
we get the README updated with where to find docutils?

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan?? |?? ncoghlan at gmail.com?? |?? Brisbane, Australia

From g.brandl at gmx.net  Sat Mar 26 18:12:10 2011
From: g.brandl at gmx.net (Georg Brandl)
Date: Sat, 26 Mar 2011 18:12:10 +0100
Subject: [python-committers] PEPs repo converted
In-Reply-To: <AANLkTi=euw-gnYWnR9eE1UPaHvgNnvX0=k-RXzdiZ=dQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <imdluc$u51$1@dough.gmane.org>
	<AANLkTi=euw-gnYWnR9eE1UPaHvgNnvX0=k-RXzdiZ=dQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <iml6p5$bst$1@dough.gmane.org>

On 26.03.2011 05:01, Nick Coghlan wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 24, 2011 at 6:41 AM, Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:
>> 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 :)
> 
> With the quick and easy svn:external reference to docutils gone, could
> we get the README updated with where to find docutils?

I'd have thought that docutils is pretty much universally available
nowadays.  But you're right that README is out of date, I've updated
it now.

Georg


From ncoghlan at gmail.com  Sun Mar 27 05:35:21 2011
From: ncoghlan at gmail.com (Nick Coghlan)
Date: Sun, 27 Mar 2011 13:35:21 +1000
Subject: [python-committers] PEPs repo converted
In-Reply-To: <iml6p5$bst$1@dough.gmane.org>
References: <imdluc$u51$1@dough.gmane.org>
	<AANLkTi=euw-gnYWnR9eE1UPaHvgNnvX0=k-RXzdiZ=dQ@mail.gmail.com>
	<iml6p5$bst$1@dough.gmane.org>
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=wSwrCP+R+nSo+-tuMXNWYkerH=ZEmqsz6Knuk@mail.gmail.com>

On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 3:12 AM, Georg Brandl <g.brandl at gmx.net> wrote:
> I'd have thought that docutils is pretty much universally available
> nowadays. ?But you're right that README is out of date, I've updated
> it now.

Yeah, it turned out to just be a "sudo apt-get python-docutils" away.
I'm just unused to having to even think about it :)

Cheers,
Nick.

-- 
Nick Coghlan?? |?? ncoghlan at gmail.com?? |?? Brisbane, Australia