Update webdriver.js

[RichCrook]

This statement should be terminated.

[ddavison]

This change is super small, so it's not important now, but could you sign the CLA for me?

That's one step you won't have to do next pull-request. go ahead and confirm to me that you have signed it once you have.

[ddavison]

Merged in as 9dea9e8

[RichCrook]

Hello,
I have signed the CLA
Thanks!
Rich

Sent from my iPhone! omg

On Oct 23, 2015, at 10:56 AM, Dj [email protected] wrote:

This change is super small, so it's not important now, but could you sign the CLA for me?

That's one step you won't have to do next pull-request. go ahead and confirm to me that you have signed it once you have.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub.

[sdimkov]

@ddavison I have two questions out of curiosity:

Instead of directly accepting the PR you commit on contributor's behalf. Is this being done to avoid a merge commit in master?

Also I noticed in other PRs requests to squash the commits. Is this also done to make manually moving commits to master easier?

[ddavison]

@shs96c would be able to explain that better, but from my understanding:

1. no, not to avoid a merge conflict in master. this is done because of legal jargon.. [signing off commits] was introduced in the wake of the SCO lawsuit, (and other accusations of copyright infringement from SCO, most of which they never actually took to court), as a Developers Certificate of Origin. It is used to say that you certify that you have created the patch in question, or that you certify that to the best of your knowledge, it was created under an appropriate open-source license, or that it has been provided to you by someone else under those terms. This can help establish a chain of people who take responsibility for the copyright status of the code in question, to help ensure that copyrighted code not released under an appropriate free software (open source) license is not included in the kernel. (source)

2. squashing is a convenience, yes - when we do our signoffs of commits, we actually cherry pick commits, and you use commit hashes to do that. multiple commits Please accept this documentation update #1 - takes time, and Fuzzbal #2 - is sometimes unnecessary. especially when the pr has 4 commits, that commit only one piece of functionality (the other three commits were typo fixes, etc)

[cgoldberg]

it seems onerous to ask for a CLA on trivial fixes like this (I'm pretty sure you can't assert copyright on a patch consisting of a single character syntax fix anyway)

perhaps an exemption like this would work:
https://docs.puppetlabs.com/community/trivial_patch_exemption.html

... and SCO was just 1 of many trolls exploiting the broken system :)

[ddavison]

hence the "it's not important now [to sign the cla]" @cgoldberg

If you read my comment, I was asking him so next pull request he won't have to especially if his pull request is something bigger.

we already basically do use that exemption. I think you need to reread my comments :)