I agree with Ray. Open ACLs is a big + for GNOME and there are no significant evidence of abuse of that. Big NO for the artificial barriers by fine grained ACLs
On 16 May 2017 at 23:51, Ray Strode <halfl...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, >> >> It's quite hard to get commit access atm because you have to be >> trusted initially. If a maintainer can give commit access to one repo >> he/she watches anyway there is less trust needed in the beginning. Or >> if a new contributor wants to take over an abandoned project. > > is that true? I mean you have to have someone with commit access vouch for > you but that's a pretty low bar. I don't think it should be any lower than > that, but I also wouldn't want to see it higher than that. GNOME has had > open ACLs from the beginning and it's a good thing! There's no evidence of > abuse, we shouldn't go locking everything down just because we can. > > IMO, there should be three access tiers: > > 1) Can report issues and propose fixes > 2) Can triage issues > 3) Can fix issues > > Anything more granular than that is a bad idea. It just introduces > artificial barriers that people will run into. (What happens when a > maintainer goes AWOL ?) > > Let's keep things open like we always have! > > --Ray > > > > _______________________________________________ > desktop-devel-list mailing list > desktop-devel-list@gnome.org > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list -- Kind Regards, Kunal _______________________________________________ desktop-devel-list mailing list desktop-devel-list@gnome.org https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/desktop-devel-list
