From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:38900) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ioSCp-0004w4-J3 for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2020 08:14:04 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ioSCo-00023a-Dh for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2020 08:14:03 -0500 Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:39338) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ioSCo-00023T-Am for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2020 08:14:02 -0500 Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ioSCo-0003zF-5P for guix-patches@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2020 08:14:02 -0500 Subject: [bug#38846] [PATCH 0/4] Move 'HACKING' to the manual, and a proposal for commit access Resent-Message-ID: From: Ludovic =?UTF-8?Q?Court=C3=A8s?= References: <20200101162945.4946-1-ludo@gnu.org> Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2020 14:13:03 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20200101162945.4946-1-ludo@gnu.org> ("Ludovic \=\?utf-8\?Q\?Cour\?\= \=\?utf-8\?Q\?t\=C3\=A8s\=22's\?\= message of "Wed, 1 Jan 2020 17:29:45 +0100") Message-ID: <875zhod8yo.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-patches-bounces+kyle=kyleam.com@gnu.org Sender: "Guix-patches" To: guix-maintainers@gnu.org Cc: 38846@debbugs.gnu.org Hello! Just a heads-up for fellow maintainers (Tobias, Marius, Maxim): could you send a =E2=80=9C+1=E2=80=9D or whatever you deem appropriate :-) to thi= s discussion? I=E2=80=99d like to make sure we=E2=80=99re on the same page. https://issues.guix.gnu.org/issue/38846 Ludo=E2=80=99. Ludovic Court=C3=A8s skribis: > Hello Guix! > > Happy new year, merry 12 niv=C3=B4se, or whatever celebration is > appropriate for you! :-) > > These patches do three things: > > 1. Move text from =E2=80=98HACKING=E2=80=99 to =E2=80=98doc/contributin= g.texi=E2=80=99. > > 2. Encourage patch review for committers. > > 3. Add a tentative policy for granting commit access (the last > patch of this series). > > I expect #1 and #2 to be uncontroversial, but I=E2=80=99d like feedback o= n #3! > > So far, we=E2=80=99ve been giving commit access in a very ad-hoc fashion. > Often it was Ricardo or myself who ended up taking care of that, > even though other people have admin rights on Savannah to add/remove > members. > > We briefly discussed it among maintainers after the maintainer > collective expanded, and it seems to me that perhaps now is a good time > to formalize things a bit=E2=80=94to clarify what contributors may expect= and > to increase transparency. Hence this proposal of a simple co-optation > policy. > > As you know, Chris Baines has been working towards automated testing > of submitted patches. One of the goals is to allow part of the > QA to be automated, such that, eventually, approved merges could be > automated. In that spirit, we would have an incentive to not add more > committers (probably also a good thing security-wise). That=E2=80=99s wh= y I > added a note on this topic. > > What do people think? > > Thanks, > Ludo=E2=80=99. > > Ludovic Court=C3=A8s (4): > doc: Add "Tracking Bugs and Patches" section. > doc: Move "Commit Access" section from 'HACKING' to the manual. > doc: Encourage patch review. > DRAFT doc: Add a cooption policy for commit access. > > HACKING | 58 +------------- > doc/contributing.texi | 171 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > doc/guix.texi | 2 +- > 3 files changed, 168 insertions(+), 63 deletions(-)