Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

add CONTRIBUTING.md #50

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
May 20, 2014
Merged

Conversation

rkuhn
Copy link
Member

@rkuhn rkuhn commented May 12, 2014

  • define the Copyright Statement signing process
  • describe the acceptance process
  • clarify how pull requests should look like

fixes #28

* define the Copyright Statement signing process
* describe the acceptance process
* clarify how pull requests should look like

fixes reactive-streams#28
@benjchristensen
Copy link
Contributor

How would you like us to add our names to the CopyrightWaivers.txt file? After the merge of this as new PRs? Or as PRs to your forked branch?

@rkuhn
Copy link
Member Author

rkuhn commented May 13, 2014

Either would work, I have no strong opinion on this—whatever goes faster ;-)


Follow these guidelines when creating public commits and writing commit messages.

1. If your work spans multiple local commits (for example; if you do safe point commits while working in a feature branch or work in a branch for long time doing merges/rebases etc.) then please do not commit it all but rewrite the history by squashing the commits into a single big commit which you write a good commit message for (like discussed in the following sections). For more info read this article: [Git Workflow](http://sandofsky.com/blog/git-workflow.html). Every commit should be able to be used in isolation, cherry picked etc.

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

yay.

@mariusae
Copy link

LGTM

@rkuhn
Copy link
Member Author

rkuhn commented May 19, 2014

Last time I commented on the wrong issue, so I past it here as well:

We will need consensus on this one ASAP in order to be able to merge things, so I urge everyone to review this and either sign off on it or suggest fixes to the flaws they see. If one of the proposed gatekeepers has not responded by Wednesday (May 21, 2014) 12:00 UTC I will remove them from the proposal. This does not mean that more parties cannot be added later (as detailed in the rules), and it sure is not meant disrespectfully in any way, we just need to be able to move things forward. I fully understand that people can be overwhelmed with other duties, in which case it will only help to be “off the hook”. Being a gatekeeper is not the only way to contribute, everyone can still fully support and endorse the project.

I have changed the CopyrightWaivers.txt to contain the email address used in git commits instead of the home address, that is more directly useful.

@jbrisbin
Copy link

LGTM

2 similar comments
@benjchristensen
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM

@mariusae
Copy link

LGTM

@purplefox
Copy link

I've checked with legal and looks good to me too.

@tmontgomery
Copy link

LGTM

@rkuhn
Copy link
Member Author

rkuhn commented May 20, 2014

With great joy I announce that we have full consensus on the “constitution”. This is an important milestone, here’s to many successful pull requests!

rkuhn added a commit that referenced this pull request May 20, 2014
@rkuhn rkuhn merged commit add9b85 into reactive-streams:master May 20, 2014
@rkuhn rkuhn deleted the wip-CONTRIBUTING-rk branch May 20, 2014 19:54
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

[High priority] CLA facility for CC0
6 participants