[Kde-scm-interest] Accountability, concrete suggestion

[Patrick Aljord]

On Fri, Aug 1, 2008 at 2:37 PM, Thomas Zander
<Thomas.Zander at trolltech.com> wrote:
> It is so much more powerful to have an open specification for the log and a
> clear access to the log data (its in the same repo as the rest).
>
> So, thats what I have against only putting it in the database, what exactly is
> the problem with having it in the git tree as well?
>

I can't see how you would have the loggin branch in the same repo. The
server only holds bare repositories so committing directly to a bare
repo from the server is not possible. The other solution would be to
host non-bare repo on the server but that wouldn't be a very good
solution IMO.

We could use a distributed database like couchdb with a json api so
people can easily retrieve the logs from bash. Plus it's all free
software so people will always have access to how it works.

>> Though I still do think that the network of trust is enough and all
>> that is overkill. I mean if the kernel doesn't need that kind of stuff
>> then why do we?
>
> Because only Linus commits to his tree, in KDE several hundreds of people
> commit in one tree.

Linus is the only one to commits to his tree but he has many
lieutenants he trusts and who checks the various kernel modules for
him. Though Linus checks the code he merges, he relies a lot on the
work of his lieutenants.