On Sat, Jan 3, 2009 at 5:17 PM, "Martin v. Löwis" martin@v.loewis.de wrote:
Yes, that's the problem. Is it not possible to have finer permission (instead of boolean permission: commit or not commit)? Eg. give commit access but only for a file or a directory? It looks like Tarek Ziade is now allowed to commit, but only on distutils. I like such permission because nobody knows the whole Python project, it's too huge for a single brain ;-)
I like them, too - that's why I'm generally not opposed to handing out such privileges fairly generously. In our experience, you don't need to enforce such a restriction technically - the social enforcement (you lose access if you are changing things you were not supposed to change) is sufficient.
This is a great model, as long as the concerned people focus in specific topics/areas.
I think it is harder to apply for people that does fuzz testing on the code base : the core is impacted most of the time.
There's another concern with that model, and I am wondering about it for the next series of patches I am working on in distutils.
Since I will probably add some documentation, and since this documentation will probably benefit from some reviews, what would be the best process ?
1/ commit the changeset and ask for a post-review by Georg (or others) 2/ hold the changeset in a diff for a pre-review ?
-> 1/ is better for the flow, but the quality of the doc might suffer from it if Georg (or others) doesn't have time to review it 2/ slows things down, make the feature/change unavailable until Georg (or others) had the time to review it
Regards Tarek
-- Tarek Ziadé | Association AfPy | www.afpy.org Blog FR | http://programmation-python.org Blog EN | http://tarekziade.wordpress.com/