[Kde-scm-interest] meeting summary

[Oswald Buddenhagen]

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:14:17AM +0100, Lydia Pintscher wrote:
> Once all of KDE is on gitorious it will be extremely hard to maintain
> the policy of only having these $-developer groups for merge requests
> and nothing else. And the more of those groups we create with every
> project that moves the bigger the incentive will be to not use
> +kde-developers but the smaller group for commit rights.
> 
why do you bring +kde-developers in? it is *exactly* the equivalent of
having an svn account.
what you *might* want to consider is having separate <project>-reviewers
and <project>-developers groups - in case you want to give -developers
more rights, like editing the home page or admin rights. but that can
stay within the projects, as the project groups are defined to be
self-administering. to minimize overhead, you'd give reviewer access to
both -developers and -reviewers, so devs would not need to be in two
project groups.
what you *must not* do is giving anyone else but kde-developers the
commit role, as that would violate the legal precondition of agreeing to
have one's identity revealed by the post-receive script. i'm sure we
could have that enforced by technical means if we ask nicely. :)

On Thu, Dec 10, 2009 at 12:15:02AM +0100, Lydia Pintscher wrote:
> Forgot to mention that it is currently not possible to join or leave a
> group without contacting an admin...
> 
well, yeah, one of the group's admins. amarok currently has three. sure,
it's inconvenient (that's why we want something better), but it works -
and it is better than (illegally) spamming everyone with the
notifications.