Differences between revisions 12 and 13
Revision 12 as of 2013-07-03 23:42:44
Size: 4596
Revision 13 as of 2013-07-03 23:46:56
Size: 4586
Comment: minor fixes
Deletions are marked like this. Additions are marked like this.
Line 13: Line 13:
  * data in the bug tracking system: http://bugzilla.spamassassin.org/   * data in the bug tracking system: https://issues.apache.org/SpamAssassin/
Line 15: Line 15:
    * talk archives: [[http://news.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spamassassin.general|gmane]], [[http://marc.info/?l=spamassassin-talk|theaimsgroup]]
    * devel archives: [[http://news.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spamassassin.devel|gmane]], [[http://marc.info/?l=spamassassin-devel|theaimsgroup]]
    * talk archives: [[http://news.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spamassassin.general|GMANE]], [[http://marc.info/?l=spamassassin-talk|MARC]]
    * devel archives: [[http://news.gmane.org/gmane.mail.spam.spamassassin.devel|GMANE]], [[http://marc.info/?l=spamassassin-devel|MARC]]

Vetting Process for SpamAssassin CLAs

We started by identifying all the names of people who had contributed code, rules or documentation to SpamAssassin since the project was founded.

This was to identify the full list of contributors to the open-source code base, including patches that were trivial, affected a very small number of lines of code, or did not add functionality (e.g. a bug fix etc.).

We assembled this from several sources:

Note for NAI readers: this differs from the NAI internal process, in that we assembled a list of *all* contributors from the entire project lifetime. In other words -- it was not performed based on what was in the lines of code we wanted, since we needed to "cleanse" the entire codebase.

Initial list was: http://taint.org/wk/SAContribList?action=recall&date=1065743884

The list was maintained at http://taint.org/wk/SAContribList -- revision history on that page is here: http://taint.org/wk/SAContribList?action=info

We then went through the list, searching for email addresses for these users, and narrowed it down a little as it became evident that some of the "credits.html" users had not contributed any code. -- Craig had added their names from the earliest list of names of people who had opened bugs in Bugzilla, believing that they'd contributed code. In some cases, they had not contributed code; just a bug report. He said:

{{{These are probably mostly names I added to the credits page while at

  • Deersoft -- I'll go through hopefully this evening and try and pull

together how they all made the list. The criteria were pretty loose, so many of these will probably migrate to the removed section at that point

  • -- these are probably mostly people who filed bugzilla tickets as of some date back when.}}}

In this file, the users are listed one-per-line, with a symbol indicating their status, their name and email addr, and a piece of text describing what they contributed or comments regarding this contribution.

By 2003-11-03, we had narrowed it down sufficiently, and needed to make it more easily shareable -- so we moved it to a private CVS repository here: http://cvs.sourceforge.net/viewcvs.py/spamassassin/asfpurgatory/spamassassin.csv The current, most up-to-date list is at the "view (text)" link on that page.

The format of this file is a comma-separated values list, with each line like so:

cla_confirmed,code_removed,Ryan Cleary,<tryanc(at)interdimensions.com>,no,DCC support 2-line bug fix. no longer in codebase. 2002-07-08.; not in the distro anymore

The first word is the status of the CLA: whether it was received by the ASF or not. Second the status of the code contribution:

  • "code_removed" for code that was removed from CVS so no CLA required,
  • "third_with_cla" for third-party contributors with a CLA on file,
  • "reimplement" for code that was removed and needs to be reimplemented from scratch,
  • "third_no_cla" for third-party contributions without a CLA yet,
  • "none_needed" for cases where there was no contribution that required a CLA, etc.

Next comes the name and email address, followed by a "where is the CLA" field used to track CLAs in transit, and finally, a textual description of what the change was, where it went, when, and whether it is still required.

The list is complete; all contributors fell into these piles:

  • Code removed -- their contribution either became obsolete and was removed, was rewritten, or was removed due to difficulties getting a CLA
  • Third party with CLA, and CLA confirmed -- they sent in a CLA, and Apache have confirmed its receipt
  • Third party with CLA, no CLA confirmed -- they sent in a CLA, but Apache have not accepted it. This status applies to 2 CLAs, which were sent electronically -- and received -- but not than on paper.


ClaVettingProcess (last edited 2013-07-03 23:46:56 by KarstenBräckelmann)