[PATCH][rfc][doc] extending the contribution guidelines

[PATCH][rfc][doc] extending the contribution guidelines

[ng0]

Hello,

this message is an introduction to the patches which will follow
in their own messages with the common goal to fix the
documentation (I.), furthermore there is a general copyright
assignment question in (II.).

This was not planned to be so unstructured, but here we go:

== I. ==

Neither our CoC nor the Coding Standards, both linked in file
'contributing.texi', give away the additions I wrote, only if you
read between the lines - which is not a good idea.

We have no documentation on wether using a legal name for
contributions is required or not and if name changes are okay.
Currently, you usually get this info from us by either reading
commit logs and spotting names like Jookia or ng0 or by directly
asking. The CoC gives away all the details needed but I do not
feel that we should extend it (at least at the moment) with
examples.

What these patches do is to extend the documentation by:

1. Add a comment which points out that people should try to use
   their, them etc (with external link).
2. Explain that your legal name is not required to contribute
   (ommitted until Ia and II are discussed).
3. Explain that unrelated changes should not be mixed.
4. Mail format: Point out a preference of plain text messages
   with either inline or MIME attachments and advise contributors
   to pay attention if their email client breaks the patches.

This is influenced by emacs CONTRIB, libreboot contributing, and
my own thoughts on this.

=== Ia. ===
We allow any names people choose to use, what speak against
having pseudo-anonymous contributions under
email: "noname@guixsd.org", name: "Guix Contributor" in the log
messages?
In one project I participate in, some people also started to use
name: "psyc://loupsycedyglgamf.onion/~name-of-person",
email: "BM-IDwhichisalonghash"
the psyc URI is something unique where people can be reached and
so is the provided Bitmessage ID.

We could also allow patches which are proxied through someone
who already contributed.

Which leads us to the final question which is a bit related to this:

== II. ==

A question on copyright assignment: We have the Guix Europe
association. Could we not use it for copyright assignments in
file headers like this, either in addition to the already
existing ones or use it exclusively?

;;; Copyright © 2015, 2016 the Guix Europe association

Why would it be a bad idea, why would it be a good idea?

My opinion without knowing all the legal possibilities and
implications:
We maintain this collaborative, in a structure which already
works like an low hirachy association. Git logs are terrible (for
example when people change their legal name[3]), but there's an
email address or another URI similar to point to when something
breaks. Patches currently happen mostly via Email first and are
discussed before commited - there's an associated address in the
archives and gmane (or at least in some form).
What do we need individual names/pennames for in the headers?

[0]:https://libreboot.org/git/#guidelines
[1]:https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Code_of_conduct
[2]:https://archwomen.org/
[3]:https://geekfeminism.org/2012/09/29/quick-hit-how-git-shows-the-patriarchal-nature-of-the-software-industry/#content
--
♥Ⓐ  ng0 – http://we.make.ritual.n0.is
For non-prism friendly talk find me on http://www.psyced.org
SecuShare – http://secushare.org

Re: [PATCH][rfc][doc] extending the contribution guidelines

[Andreas Enge]

Hello,

On Thu, Jul 21, 2016 at 06:05:03PM +0000, ng0 wrote:
> A question on copyright assignment: We have the Guix Europe
> association. Could we not use it for copyright assignments in
> file headers like this, either in addition to the already
> existing ones or use it exclusively?
> ;;; Copyright © 2015, 2016 the Guix Europe association
> Why would it be a bad idea, why would it be a good idea?

this would be a very bad idea - we are not the FSF, but just a bunch of Guix
people, without particular legal and administrative resources. One could
imagine assigning copyright to the FSF, but copyright assignments are a
rather big barrier for contributing. Things seem to work quite well without
adding more administration...

Andreas

Re: [PATCH][rfc][doc] extending the contribution guidelines

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi!

ng0 <ng0@we.make.ritual.n0.is> skribis:

> === Ia. ===
> We allow any names people choose to use, what speak against
> having pseudo-anonymous contributions under
> email: "noname@guixsd.org", name: "Guix Contributor" in the log
> messages?
> In one project I participate in, some people also started to use
> name: "psyc://loupsycedyglgamf.onion/~name-of-person",
> email: "BM-IDwhichisalonghash"
> the psyc URI is something unique where people can be reached and
> so is the provided Bitmessage ID.

We definitely accept contributions made with pseudonyms, and I agree
it’s a good idea to explicitly state it in the manual.

> == II. ==
>
> A question on copyright assignment: We have the Guix Europe
> association. Could we not use it for copyright assignments in
> file headers like this, either in addition to the already
> existing ones or use it exclusively?
>
> ;;; Copyright © 2015, 2016 the Guix Europe association
>
> Why would it be a bad idea, why would it be a good idea?

I agree with what Andreas wrote.

Thanks,
Ludo’.

Re: [PATCH][rfc][doc] extending the contribution guidelines

[Ludovic Courtès]

ng0 <ng0@we.make.ritual.n0.is> skribis:

> We have no documentation on wether using a legal name for
> contributions is required or not and if name changes are okay.

Commit dfcdd9c25d552fb2691552837b2f2f50bb0b14fb clarifies that.

Ludo’.