Conversation
Temporary probe branch for contributor-agreement-plan.md rollout testing. Expected: the DCO check FAILS on this commit and the significance check labels the PR needs-icla (new source file under src/). Branch is deleted immediately after.
This pull request passes the ICLA thresholdThanks for a substantial contribution — that is exactly the kind this gate is looking for, and it is not a complaint. Most contributions to psstools need no paperwork beyond a sign-off. This one trips the published significance threshold because:
What that means. An Individual Contributor License Agreement is needed before this merges. It is a license grant, not a copyright assignment — you keep your copyright. It exists so the project can be contributed to a standards organization such as Accellera later without tracking down every contributor. See the relicensing notice. What to do. Nothing yet — a maintainer will follow up here with the paperwork. Review and iteration continue as normal in the meantime; the ICLA is needed before merge, not before discussion. If you are contributing on company time, your employer most likely owns the copyright and a personal ICLA will not cover it. Please say so below — a Corporate CLA is the right instrument and it is much cheaper to start that conversation now than after review. If this looks wrong — a mechanical rename, a generated-file refresh, or anything that trips on volume rather than originality — say so. Maintainers waive the requirement in exactly those cases. Line counts approximate originality; they do not define it. |
|
Verification complete. DCO failed as designed on the unsigned commit, the significance gate labelled this |
Re-verification of the CA-T1/CA-T2 gates against the fixed reusable-workflow wiring (
reusable-dco.yml/reusable-significance.yml).One deliberately unsigned commit that adds a new file under
src/.Expected: DCO fails; significance labels
needs-iclaciting clause 1.Closed and deleted as soon as both report.