From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bastien Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH] specify a time, not number of minutes to keep, with org-resolve-clock Date: Sat, 01 Feb 2020 15:34:54 +0100 Message-ID: <8736bu9y0h.fsf@bzg.fr> References: <87sgk4o2j2.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87imkuwhs4.fsf@gnu.org> <87y2tmd2ug.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87sgjuh2rf.fsf@gnu.org> <87h80acs29.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:60024) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ixtrO-0002tM-9W for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Feb 2020 09:34:59 -0500 List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" To: Nicolas Goaziou Cc: Dan Drake , emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Hi Nicolas, Nicolas Goaziou writes: > Bastien writes: > >> My point is that distinguishing trivial vs. non-trivial parts of a >> change may be subject to interpretation. When in doubt, I recommend >> staying on the safe side of not accepting a change that is more than >> 15 lines of "maybe-significant" changes. > > AFACT, there was no doubt involved when I said "15 lines of non-trivial > code". I'm sure there was no doubt on your side, but as the one responsible for the consistency of copyright assignment for Org-mode, my attention is necessarily triggered when I see a change of >20 lines marked as "tiny change". I fully trust your judgement. I am not arguing that *this* change required Dan to sign the papers. I'm saying that in general, I would rather avoid relying on the evaluation of the "triviality" of the locs and incite contributors to sign the papers. > If your point (I didn't get it actually) is "interpretation is hard, > let's not interpret anything and count everything as significant", well, > I think this is not a good way to look at the problem. But that's fine, > as long as it suits you. My point is this: the inconveniency of *systematically* requesting copyright assignment from the contributor when its contribution is more than 15 lines (significant *or not*) is a small inconveniency compared to the one of having to check carefully whether every >15 lines change is significant or not. And since is it a good outcome to have more people signing the FSF papers, I recommend requesting contributors to sign the copyright assignment for every >15 lines contributions (significant or not). Future maintainers may of course interpret the recommendations of the FSF differently, but that's mine for now. Thanks, -- Bastien