Skip to content

Update programming-languages collection to allow more projects to join#4880

Merged
jmeridth merged 1 commit intogithub:mainfrom
ell1e:main
Sep 9, 2025
Merged

Update programming-languages collection to allow more projects to join#4880
jmeridth merged 1 commit intogithub:mainfrom
ell1e:main

Conversation

@ell1e
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@ell1e ell1e commented Sep 9, 2025

(As a side note which for lack of another communication channel I'm putting here, you seem to require Signed-off-by for your commits, but seemingly the notices have no info on what that means. You don't seem to be using something like the common "Developer Certificate of Origin" for example. I'd like to point out that at least to me, the sign off seems to be ambiguous and potentially pointless, since I feel like it's not really clear what that means to anybody. If it's to accept the licensing and to certify that I wrote the commit, then perhaps the notices should point that out. However, I could be wrong, I'm not a lawyer.)

Please confirm this pull request meets the following requirements:

Which change are you proposing?

  • Suggesting edits to an existing topic or collection
  • Curating a new topic or collection
  • Something that does not neatly fit into the binary options above

Editing an existing topic or collection

I'm suggesting these edits to an existing topic or collection:

  • Image (and my file is *.png, square, dimensions 288x288, size <= 75 kB)
  • Content (and my changes are in index.md)
  • Description

I'm suggesting that the collection description allow languages that are still actively developed but where their Github presence might be, while up-to-date, secondary and not where issues are tracked.

I'm suggesting this change because:

  • None of the other collections have the requirement in the description for their Github repository to be the main repository.

  • This collection already has entries like https://github.com/TinyCC/tinycc that don't fulfill this constraint.

  • In the light of some recent Github decisions, perhaps projects shouldn't be discouraged from using Github as a secondary presence rather than primary.

Curating a new topic or collection

  • I've formatted my changes as a new folder directory, named for the topic or collection as it appears in the URL on GitHub (e.g. https://github.com/topics/[NAME] or https://github.com/collections/[NAME])
  • My folder contains a *.png image (if applicable) and index.md
  • All required fields in my index.md conform to the Style Guide and API docs: https://github.com/github/explore/tree/main/docs

Please replace this line with an explanation of why you think this topic or collection should be curated.

Something that does not neatly fit into the binary options above

  • My suggested edits are not about an existing topic or collection, or at least not a single one
  • My suggested edits are not about curating a new topic or collection, or at least not a single one
  • My suggested edits conform to the Style Guide and API docs: https://github.com/github/explore/tree/main/docs

Please replace this line with an explanation of your proposed changes.


@ell1e ell1e requested a review from a team as a code owner September 9, 2025 01:01
@jmeridth
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

jmeridth commented Sep 9, 2025

@ell1e I've removed the requirement for signing of commits. That was checked for contributions made via the web UI and I agree, it's a bit ambiguous without DCO involved. We are still reviewing your change, as I think we want to highlight code on GitHub, not on other source code providers. Will let you know soon.

@ell1e
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

ell1e commented Sep 9, 2025

For clarity, I hereby agree to license my suggested contribution, if that one liner even qualifies for any licensing, under whatever license you require. My remark about the signing off wasn't meant to indicate that I disagree with the licensing.

@jmeridth
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

jmeridth commented Sep 9, 2025

For clarity, I hereby agree to license my suggested contribution, if that one liner even qualifies for any licensing, under whatever license you require. My remark about the signing off wasn't meant to indicate that I disagree with the licensing.

We tend to follow the inbound=outbound philosphy re: licensing. We have a CC-4.0 license on this repo.

...meaning that by submitting a pull request on GitHub, contributors agree to contribute under that code under the same license as your project (making a CLA unnecessary in most cases).

😄

@jmeridth jmeridth added this pull request to the merge queue Sep 9, 2025
Merged via the queue into github:main with commit 979130b Sep 9, 2025
5 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants