[Kde-scm-interest] meeting summary

[Jeff Mitchell]

On 12/11/2009 4:52 PM, Chani wrote:
>> I'm talking about technical capabilities. Policy is something else
>> entirely. It's nice that webkit does things <whatever way it does it>
>> but that doesn't mean anything to us.
> 
> so... you two are debating whether everyone in kde-developers should have 
> permission to update/merge a project's merge requests?
> 
> hmm.

No. I'm claiming that reviewers should also have commit access because
there's not much point to reviewing patches if you can't apply it. (So
your reviewers for a particular repo, which will probably be those
familiar with particular code, are a superset of +kde-developers).
Personally, I'm not really afraid of random kde devs coming along and
doing something silly like closing merge requests when they shouldn't --
if someone is behaving badly, just take away their privs and be done
with it. I think as long as we can separate who gets all the merge
request emails from who has review capability (so everyone isn't driven
bananas), +kde-developers should have the ability to handle merge
requests for all KDE repos. This way, if a module's maintainers falls
off the face of the earth, someone else can easily work on merging in
needed patches.

What I gather from Ossi's claims is that Webkit is a pretty untrusting
community where they trust people to fix typos and commit those fixes
themselves but you'll be kicked out if you apply that same typo fix that
someone sent in as a merge request and you're not one of the official
reviewers. Yuck.

I'm not sure of the relevancy of Ossi's arguments, but I think I summed
up the technical needs that are important to us well enough here:
http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-scm-interest/2009-December/000871.html

--Jeff

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 196 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-scm-interest/attachments/20091211/650bdf96/attachment.sig