Hi,
I would highly recommend using this workflow. Ideally, we should use the same git workflow for all the scipy-related projects. That way developers can switch between projects without having to switch workflows. The model that Matthew and Fernando developed for nipy and ipython seem like a very reasonable place to start. __
I wouldn't. Who is going to be the gate keeper and pull the stuff? No vacations for him/her, on 24 hour call, yes? They might as well run a dairy. And do we really want all pull requests cross-posted to the list? Linus works full time as gatekeeper for Linux and gets paid for the effort. I think a central repository model would work better for us.
This is just a gentle request - please - wait - and follow Anne's advice - we are smart and versatile and we can adapt. I'm guessing you haven't used git live in a project yet? I've noticed that - until you have got used to the git / DVCS workflow - it seems like it would cause problems. But I strongly encourage you to read these posts from Joel Spolsky http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2010/03/17.html and http://hginit.com/00.html The links are about mercurial, but apply equally to git. But the main point is - lots of teams have already switched, and the teams that have switched, never look back. I think no-one I know who has used git seriously for a week or two could imagine going back to the kind of model we need when using subversion. It's very difficult to explain (the posts above are a good attempt) but it's a very common experience. See you, Matthew