[Python-Dev] Introducing Electronic Contributor Agreements
breamoreboy at yahoo.co.uk
Tue Mar 5 01:51:24 CET 2013
On 04/03/2013 22:08, Brett Cannon wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 4:33 PM, Mark Lawrence <breamoreboy at yahoo.co.uk
> <mailto:breamoreboy at yahoo.co.uk>> wrote:
> On 04/03/2013 20:46, Terry Reedy wrote:
> On 3/4/2013 11:36 AM, Brett Cannon wrote:
> On Mon, Mar 4, 2013 at 11:30 AM, Brian Curtin
> <brian at python.org <mailto:brian at python.org>
> <mailto:brian at python.org <mailto:brian at python.org>>> wrote:
> The full announcement is at
> but a summary follows.
> We've now moved to an electronic Contributor License
> form at
> <http://www.python.org/psf/contrib/contrib-form/> which will
> ease the signing and sending of forms for our potential
> The form shows the required fields whether you're
> signing as an
> individual or a representative of an organization, and
> removes the
> need to print, scan, fax, etc.
> When a new contributor fills in the form, they are
> emailed a copy of
> the form and asked to confirm the email address that
> they used (and
> received that copy at). Upon confirming, the signed
> form is sent to
> the PSF Administrator and filed away.
> The signature can either be generated from your typed
> name, or you
> draw or upload your actual written signature if you choose.
> With this in place I would like to propose that all patches
> submitted to
> bugs.python.org <http://bugs.python.org>
> <http://bugs.python.org> must come from someone who has
> signed the CLA before we consider committing it (if you want
> to be truly
> paranoid we could say that we won't even look at the code
> w/o a CLA).
> Either policy could be facilitated by tracker changes. In order
> to see
> the file upload box, one must login and the tracker knows who
> has a CLA
> on file (as indicated by a * suffix on the name). If a file is
> by someone without, a box could popup with the link to the
> e-form and a
> message that a CLA is required.
> People already use the bug tracker as an excuse not to contribute,
> wouldn't this requirement make the situation worse?
> Depends on your paranoia. If you're worried about accidentally lifting
> IP merely by reading someone's source code, then you wouldn't want to
> touch code without the CLA signed.
> Now I'm not that paranoid, but I'm still not about to commit someone's
> code now without the CLA signed to make sure we are legally covered for
> the patch. If someone chooses not to contribute because of the CLA
> that's fine, but since we have already told at least Anatoly that we
> won't accept patches from him until he signs the CLA I'm not going to
> start acting differently towards others. I view legally covering our ass
> by having someone fill in a form is worth the potential loss of some
> contribution in the grand scheme of things.
Who's talking source code, you're previously mentioned *ALL* patches
needing a CLA. Does this mean you have to sign a CLA for a one line
documentation patch? What is the definition of a patch, an actual patch
file or a proposal for a change that is given within a bug tracker message?
More information about the Python-Dev