On Mon, Apr 27, 2015 at 2:01 PM, Russel Winder <[email protected]> wrote: > On Mon, 2015-04-27 at 19:45 +0200, Emmanuel Lécharny wrote: >> […] >> To be clear (or to clarify what I mean) : >> - ctr and rct are both way to process an update *for committers*. For >> contributors, a review is necessary, of course. I may have made things >> blurry in my previous mails. > > I fear there is a very CVCS definition of "committer" implicit in the > above. In DVCS the roles of committer and contributor are clearly distinct. > A committer is a person who enacts a reviewed contribution, and only that. > All contributions should be reviewed, even those of a committer. This is > about roles being distinct from people. A person may be a committer and a > contributor but the workflow of that person as contributor should be > identical to that of Joe or Jane Bloggs providing a contribution.
I think this is even more complex. There's a role (that git doesn't recognize) that of a pusher. Committer and author identities can be easily spoofed. This is one of the biggest reasons we have to maintain full push logs to be able to tell how a certain piece of code come into an ASF repository. Thanks, Roman.
