[Kde-scm-interest] meeting summary

[Chani]

On December 10, 2009 12:05:21 Jeff Mitchell wrote:
> On 12/10/2009 1:01 PM, Ian Monroe wrote:
> >> Why is it a blocker? What's actually wrong with it? What about it means
> >> that people that need or want merge request notifications can't get it,
> >> even if it means they have to ask one of the developers of the app,
> >>
> >> which makes sense given that they could then change the merge request
> >> status (thus assuming a small amount of a "developer" role)?
> >
> > How it does make sense to receive emails they have to have to be able
> > to change merge request statuses? Coupling the two makes no sense at
> > all actually.
> 
> Well, right. That's why I said that it would be better if the Gitorious
> guys further relaxed the coupling of the access controls and separated
> them out from the groups they're currently in.
> 
> However, I don't agree with the assertion that things are in this awful,
> worse-than-nothing state. Yes, they could be better. But it's halfway
> there. And you should keep in mind that it's not like users are losing
> something by not being able to get these merge request emails right now,
> because we didn't have this capability before -- so it's not like we had
> it, and then lost it. The merge requests themselves are still public,
> they're just not getting notification in their email inboxes.

oh, and there's an rss feed available too if you just want to follow them 
without the bother of joining the group.

-- 
This message brought to you by eevil bananas and the number 3.
www.chani3.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-scm-interest/attachments/20091210/6cb98e42/attachment.sig