[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[GNUnet-developers] mob branch (Re: Updating my git work-in-progess bran

From: ng0
Subject: [GNUnet-developers] mob branch (Re: Updating my git work-in-progess branch?)
Date: Sat, 16 Mar 2019 13:34:13 +0000

Christian Grothoff transcribed 1.7K bytes:
> On 3/15/19 5:06 PM, Corvus Corax wrote:
> > 
> > Only maintainers had the ability to merge into "master" or
> > "next" ("master" was always frozen between releases, so we merged into
> > "next" for new features to be tested until the next release cycle,
> > while developers would regularly merge "next" back into their dev
> > branches or rebase into a new branch to stay up to date)
> Most of what is discussed in this threat is in principle fine with me,
> but this is not. I would like to avoid setting up such hierarchies among
> developers. We're trying to build decentralized/egalitarian systems for
> liberal societies, so we should avoid building them with authoritarian
> methods.
> So I would prefer a policy where *either* _everybody_ can merge to
> master (with Git access, which is generally granted to anyone who has a
> plausible need and signed the CA), *or* _nobody_ can merge to master
> (because merges to master are done automatically by the CI when certain
> tests pass!).
> For now, I've never seen serious problems with the 'everybody' policy,
> and would strongly prefer CI-based automation to solve the issue in a
> principled way instead of adding some hierarchy.  Similarly, if we at
> some point grow to the point where peer-review/sign-off becomes
> necessary (and feasible), it should be again that in principle any 2nd
> dev can sign-off, and not just a selected few (of course in practice it
> is more likely that someone familiar with the affected subsystem will DO
> the sign-off, but it should be self-organizing and not imposed).

Would anyone else involved in the decision and administration process
be okay with a branch where anyone could push to?
My idea is like this, at least the general principle of it:
Since we require the CAA we could then pick patches from
this branch and merge them into the official branch.

Iff we change to Gitlab I'm not sure if this would still be possible
or even necessary.

My idea is that instead of "send a patch" we have another
option for people to send patches - send to a remote we
can pick a patch from.

As git admin my vote would be on yes, trying it. But I don't want
to make decisions without further feedback by other people
involved in that group.

> my 2 cents
> -Christian
> _______________________________________________
> GNUnet-developers mailing list
> address@hidden

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]