RetroSearch Browse

Tue Mar 5 17:48:07 CET 2013 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-March/124611.html

Le 05/03/2013 04:13, Stephen J. Turnbull a écrit :
> Mark Lawrence writes:
> 
>  > People already use the bug tracker as an excuse not to contribute, 
>  > wouldn't this requirement make the situation worse?
> 
> A failure to sign the CLA is already a decision not to contribute to
> the distribution

my 2 cents as an occasional contributor of minor patches: I understand
that the scarce resource is reviewer time, so I would definitely accept
to sign the CLA with my next contribution before a reviewer invests his
time in it.

However, please don't make the popup too pushy. I abhor websites which
push people into entering legally binding agreements "with one click"
without the opportunity to study them carefully (personnally, this would
not be a problem as I already know what the CLA is about, but other
contributors might not).

Also, please keep the possibility to use the old paper-based signing
procedure. I for one don't consider so-called "electronic signatures"
based on email address verification (as opposed to real crypto) to be as
good as a handwritten signature, and I don't want to legitimize them by
using them.

Cheers,
Baptiste

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-March/124611.html below:

[Python-Dev] Introducing Electronic Contributor Agreements