Kent Fredric wrote:
>> Comments?
>> ~mcummings
>>
> As a non-dev with not a lot of free time, I applaud
this suggestion.
> However, my core fear is the potential for it becoming
subject to
> abuse, and people insisting on repeatedly uploading
patches that are
> not actually wanted / necessary for the project,
despite the package
> maintainer saying 'dude , stop'
>
Well presumably if the maintainer has said it in bugzilla/
whichever
tracking mechanism you use, then it's on record. If it's
transparent, it's
hard for people to argue about it other than on the merits.
And users and
devs share a common interest in getting the software working
optimally.
> Basically, if a non-maintainer wants maintenance
rights, how do they
> go about attaining them? , an automated service, or
some vetting
> process?
>
Dunno what the procedure might end up becoming, but my
understanding is
commit right to the sunrise overlay, from where a dev has to
commit it to
the main tree. It seems like a logical extension of sunrise,
and i am sure
there are stats on who has submitted what to sunrise in the
past. So there
is a baseline for whom to invite to become
<insertNameOfNewPost>s.
> How do we go about handling the problem with the
predicted increase in
> collisions?
>
I guess it depends on what the predicted increase would be.
Maybe one of the
infra bods can enlighten us? (I'm guessing you'd take the
writes of the
users automatically selected and see how many collisions
there would have
been with the ebuilds they contributed to. A patch that got
accepted
wouldn't count, of course, if it were possible to track
same,)
> Is CVS fast enough / flexible enough for such a massive
change in users?
>
> (forgive me if I've made a misunderstanding, but im a
SVN man, not a
> CVS'er )
>
Well aiui CVS is a lot less resource-intensive than SVN and
additionally the
proposal was to utilise existing infra slightly differently.
It doesn't
sound like more workload for the servers involved.
TBH it sounds more like the kernel model than anything; each
individual is
responsible for the commits they make with their signature.
If they have
come from elsewhere is irrelevant (apart from a legal
viewpoint.) Code
responsibility lies with one, when one presses send.
kk or <Enter>
--
gentoo-dev gentoo.org mailing list
|
