[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [GNUnet-developers] Discussion, and Help Wanted: Moving to Gitlab fo

From: Christian Grothoff
Subject: Re: [GNUnet-developers] Discussion, and Help Wanted: Moving to Gitlab for Git, CI, and Issues
Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2019 13:28:16 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.5.1

On 4/7/19 1:14 PM, Schanzenbach, Martin wrote:
> As I said in another mail you are fighting windmills here. Given that we have 
> a mandatory CAA, that is where the gatekeepers come in anyway.
> And the problems you claim here are also exiting there.

Signing the CAA isn't really imposing gatekeeping. First of all, it's a
one time act, not something for every commit. Second, you can do it by
yourself, at best your employer might stop you from signing (and then
you could change jobs). And the person checking that the CAA is signed
is really just acting as a secretary: there is no brain involved in that
process, in theory it could be automated. So that's very, very different
from gatekeeping IMO.

> And regarding domain knowledge: It doesn't matter. Code review is more than 
> just functionality. It is QA.

Florian's argument on capacity still holds here. And as I keep saying,
to avoid mistakes, the best way is to automate the review, that's what
CI is all about. And I'm sure about one thing: for certain types of
issues, the CI will do a better job than me. And for the _rest_, we do
have the gnunet-svn mailinglist which does generally work to provide
post-merge feedback, which should suffice IMO.

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

reply via email to

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