projects
/
wiki.git
/ commitdiff
commit
grep
author
committer
pickaxe
?
search:
re
summary
|
shortlog
|
log
|
commit
| commitdiff |
tree
raw
|
patch
|
inline
| side by side (from parent 1:
01b5035
)
Edit page FlossContributionFAIL
author
bernie
<bernie@216.239.55.84>
Sat, 28 Jun 2014 03:25:13 +0000
(23:25 -0400)
committer
GeekiGeeki
<webmaster@codewiz.org>
Sat, 28 Jun 2014 03:25:13 +0000
(23:25 -0400)
FlossContributionFAIL
patch
|
blob
|
history
diff --git
a/FlossContributionFAIL
b/FlossContributionFAIL
index 4f7385c73e442976c4ec9af65e4f5b8230a2cd47..a3d503c5e7ca4b10516465a69a5603e9a6c9566b 100644
(file)
--- a/
FlossContributionFAIL
+++ b/
FlossContributionFAIL
@@
-1,17
+1,19
@@
== How to tell if contributing to a FLOSS project is doomed to FAIL ==
=== Contributor License Agreements ===
== How to tell if contributing to a FLOSS project is doomed to FAIL ==
=== Contributor License Agreements ===
- * Your project requires a CLA
: 10 points of FAIL
+ * Your project requires a CLA
[+10 points of FAIL]
* The CLA donates code to a for-profit [+20 points of FAIL]
* The CLA donates code to a for-profit [+20 points of FAIL]
- * The CLA donates code to an entity whch competes with other potential contributors
: +50 points of FAIL
- * The CLA doesn't give full rights on the contribution back to the contributor
: +100 points of FAIL
+ * The CLA donates code to an entity whch competes with other potential contributors
[+50 points of FAIL]
+ * The CLA doesn't give full rights on the contribution back to the contributor
[+100 points of FAIL]
=== Code review process ===
* Review process is not discoverable nor documented [+10 points of FAIL]
=== Code review process ===
* Review process is not discoverable nor documented [+10 points of FAIL]
- * Current review process differ from documentation [+5 points of FAIL]
+ * Current review process differ
s
from documentation [+5 points of FAIL]
* Simple patches require the agreement of multiple maintainers [+20 points of FAIL]
* Review process requires filing a ticket in a bug tracker for each patch [+20 points of FAIL]
* Patches must be reviewed in a bug tracker [+50 points of FAIL]
* Patches must be thrown at a review system or mailing-list, without naming a specific reviewer [+100 points of FAIL]
* Simple patches require the agreement of multiple maintainers [+20 points of FAIL]
* Review process requires filing a ticket in a bug tracker for each patch [+20 points of FAIL]
* Patches must be reviewed in a bug tracker [+50 points of FAIL]
* Patches must be thrown at a review system or mailing-list, without naming a specific reviewer [+100 points of FAIL]
- * Large portions of your code base have no designated maintainer [+50 points of FAIL]
- * A clear maintainer exists, but is inactive, unresponsive or unwilling to review patches [+100 points of FAIL]
+ * Large portions of your codebase have no designated maintainer [+50 points of FAIL]
+ * The core maintainer is rude / offensive / abusive (aka a "jerk") [+50 points of fail]
+ * A clear maintainer exists, but is inactive or unresponsive [+100 points of FAIL]
+