Speech-dispatcher, OpenTTS, and the outcome of my discussion with Brailcom staff.

[Tomas Cerha]

> 1. why not give the "oponents" commit rights on the public repo? I
> just trying to make the maintainers life a little easier, he seems to
> not be doing anything in this loop.

Well, yes, it may reveal as more practical this way.  We just tried to
come out with something simple.  Let's see how it works and we may
adjust the process based on the experience...   That is not that we
insist on something or are paranoid or whatever.  We just need a frame.

> 2. if you are maintaining a feature branch on a public repo after
> pushing that branch to a public repo it can't be rebased again,
> because doing so would break history.  What this ends up meaning is
> that say I start work on feature foo, and although its not complete I
> want to show someone else what I have so I push the branch to my
> public repo.  After this I can't rebase that branch again without
> deleting and recreating it, I can however merge.

We usually address that by publishing new rebased versions of branches
with the naming convention like experimental -> experimental.1 ->
experimental.2 etc.  We may add that into the rules.

> BTW I don't think "oponent" is the word you want there, but I think
> everybody understands what you mean.

Ok, let's say "reviewer" then if it works better.

Best regards, Tomas.