Interesting. How do you handle CLA, or more specifically, the risk that a committer pushes stuff that he pulled from somewhere else?
From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ayende Rahien Sent: Thursday, November 04, 2010 5:31 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [nhibernate-development] Re: Turn on Git support in sourceforge ? inline On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 6:24 PM, Frans Bouma <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > might arise from those options. I think that's what your discussion > basically boils down to. And I agree. For instance, a project that has > mandatory copyright assignments won't necessarily like people to pull and > push their changes from everywhere. there are numerous examples, indeed that's one of them. *cough* RavenDB has mandatory CLA, it works for us. Create local copy of trunk, make changes, run tests, create patch, send patch. patch gets applied to trunk, used does update on local copy Put a month in the middle, and suddenly this becomes much harder. For example, you might need to get approval for submitting your changes. , like everyone else and they all now get the patch. I don't see why history is a problem for the _trunk_ using people. Sure, if you create branches with code obtained from others OUTSIDE the trunk, then it's problematic, but NH is always developed on the trunk, so that's not really a problem IMHO. Or, let us say that you are using the 2.1.x branch, and you patch that, it is SO MUCH easier to do cross branch merges in git.
