unofficial mirror of guix-patches@gnu.org 
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Brett Gilio <brettg@gnu.org>
To: 38846@debbugs.gnu.org
Cc: ludo@gnu.org, me@tobias.gr, guix-maintainers@gnu.org
Subject: [bug#38846] [PATCH 4/4] DRAFT doc: Add a cooption policy for commit access.
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2020 18:19:01 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <87woa486fe.fsf@gnu.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87a770dv07.fsf@nckx> (Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Guix-patches via's message of "Tue, 07 Jan 2020 00:29:12 +0100")

Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Guix-patches via <guix-patches@gnu.org>
writes:

> Probably just me, but this glosses over maintainer approval just a bit
> too deftly, and that even with 3 signed referrals commit access isn't
> guaranteed, just extremely likely.
>
> Unless that will actually change, I think we should briefly mention it
> as well.  People react worse to ‘let's try again later’ when they
> think they've already passed.  Understandably so.

Hi Tobias,

This is definitely not just you. I felt similarly, as per a previous
email on the matter where I suggested that it be 3 commiters and 1
maintainer. But that process turned out to be redundant, if not
completely superfluous by Ricardo's mention of how the process is likely
to change in the future with a different integration model.

Regardless, I hear your point. I also think that getting refused after
achieving three referrals is a hard point. I think it should be
documented clearly that the mainters have the final say.

Additionally, and this is just a point for my part, depending on what
kind of merit we are taking for credence in a committer making a
referral, should we only consider committers who have worked closely
with the person requesting commit access, or is somebody who has
reviewed and seen their patches in passing also a viable subject?

For example, I have been asked a few times by people to push patches for
them over IRC, but their patches were unrelated to software I use /
would use / know how to approach (examples being GNOME). So, I kindly
refused to push their patch citing that I do not feel comfortable in
knowledge to understand the ramifications of their
patches. Hypothetically, if such a person approached me in the future
and asked for a commit access referral, since I had not worked closely
with them what kind of weight would be referral hold?

I hope this makes sense. Maybe I am being overly nitpicky, I just really
like clarity. :)

-- 
Brett M. Gilio
GNU Guix, Contributor | GNU Project, Webmaster
[DFC0 C7F7 9EE6 0CA7 AE55 5E19 6722 43C4 A03F 0EEE]
<brettg@gnu.org> <brettg@posteo.net>

  parent reply	other threads:[~2020-01-07  0:19 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 34+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-01-01 16:29 [bug#38846] [PATCH 0/4] Move 'HACKING' to the manual, and a proposal for commit access Ludovic Courtès
2020-01-01 16:34 ` [bug#38846] [PATCH 1/4] doc: Add "Tracking Bugs and Patches" section Ludovic Courtès
2020-01-01 16:34   ` [bug#38846] [PATCH 2/4] doc: Move "Commit Access" section from 'HACKING' to the manual Ludovic Courtès
2020-01-01 18:08     ` Ricardo Wurmus
2020-01-01 16:34   ` [bug#38846] [PATCH 3/4] doc: Encourage patch review Ludovic Courtès
2020-01-01 18:09     ` Ricardo Wurmus
2020-01-01 16:34   ` [bug#38846] [PATCH 4/4] DRAFT doc: Add a cooption policy for commit access Ludovic Courtès
2020-01-01 18:15     ` Ricardo Wurmus
2020-01-02 11:20       ` Ludovic Courtès
2020-01-07 22:36         ` Maxim Cournoyer
2020-01-01 18:51     ` zimoun
2020-01-02 11:53       ` Ludovic Courtès
2020-01-02 18:35         ` zimoun
2020-01-06  9:30           ` Ludovic Courtès
2020-01-02  4:09     ` Brett Gilio
2020-01-02 11:15       ` Ricardo Wurmus
2020-01-02 11:59       ` Ludovic Courtès
2020-01-06 23:29     ` Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Guix-patches via
2020-01-06 23:34       ` Tobias Geerinckx-Rice via Guix-patches via
2020-01-07  0:19       ` Brett Gilio [this message]
2020-01-07 11:27         ` zimoun
2020-01-09 22:39       ` bug#38846: " Ludovic Courtès
2020-01-01 18:07   ` [bug#38846] [PATCH 1/4] doc: Add "Tracking Bugs and Patches" section Ricardo Wurmus
2020-01-01 18:18   ` zimoun
2020-01-02 11:51     ` Ludovic Courtès
2020-01-02 18:40       ` zimoun
2020-01-01 18:37 ` [bug#38846] [PATCH 0/4] Move 'HACKING' to the manual, and a proposal for commit access Ricardo Wurmus
2020-01-06 13:13 ` Ludovic Courtès
2020-01-07 22:50   ` Marius Bakke
2020-01-06 21:44 ` zimoun
2020-01-07 11:17   ` Ludovic Courtès
2020-01-09 22:05   ` Ludovic Courtès
2020-01-10 15:49     ` zimoun
2020-01-13 10:01       ` Ludovic Courtès

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

  List information: https://guix.gnu.org/

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=87woa486fe.fsf@gnu.org \
    --to=brettg@gnu.org \
    --cc=38846@debbugs.gnu.org \
    --cc=guix-maintainers@gnu.org \
    --cc=ludo@gnu.org \
    --cc=me@tobias.gr \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

	https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).