For the record this mail contains what I've nagged about on IRC already - Steve you don't have to read it.
> * Push permissions are now restricted to project release managers: > https://github.com/orgs/freenet/teams/freenet-release-managers > Other authors can push to their personal repositories and open pull > requests to the project ones. This is not what had been decided. We decided to have subproject maintainers *with* push access - see the forwarded mail below. This applies to me being maintainer of WOT and FT and thus needing push access to them. [This is not just because I want it easy but also for sensible reasons: It is a luxury to still have the person available who wrote most of the code of something and therefore knows it best, and if that person is willing to maintain the repository, thats a benefit for all. The one who wrote the most code of the stuff should be dealing with reviewing incoming pull requests for sanity, not someone who hasn't worked a lot with it. Of course I could still file "virtual" pull requests to WOT/FT, i.e. pull requests from my own repository which I then merge myself because I have the permission anyway. But given the 10-30 commits which I produce every day, that would be a lot of spam with doubtful use, and I think its better if I just push directly to it. As a safeguard against shitty development, there is still the mechanism of having feature branches for everything which is incomplete and only pushing *complete* code to the master branch. I have started doing so some time ago already, and will keep it this way. After the next official WOT build, I will even introduce a "next" branch and only have the latest official build on "master" - just like it is with fred. Also, of course this does NOT mean that I want to be able to release unreviewed binaries. Before a binary is deployed, someone else from the team still should review my WOT/FT code with regards to whether its interaction with Freenet is safe. The existing approach of using Git tags will work fine for that. But the judgment of "internal" sanity of code, and therefore the right to push, should be at the one who maintains the subproject.] ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Subject: Re: [freenet-dev] Git repository structure Date: Saturday, June 21, 2014, 05:49:29 PM From: Florent Daigniere <nextg...@freenetproject.org> To: Discussion of development issues <devl@freenetproject.org> CC: x...@freenetproject.org On Sat, 2014-06-21 at 15:12 +0200, Florent Daigniere wrote: > On Sat, 2014-06-21 at 05:55 +0200, xor wrote: > > On Friday, June 20, 2014 10:30:31 PM Matthew Toseland wrote: > > > On 20/06/14 19:59, xor wrote: > > So can we get rid of this, if only at least for WOT? > > What about you maintain a (single) repository under your userid on > github... and FPI has a single repository that a RM updates whenever > your code is deployed (pushing one of the signed tags from your > repository)? Updated proposal after talking about it on IRC: Each sub-project hosted by FPI has a "Maintainer" The sub-project's repositories are hosted under the FPI banner. The only person pushing to it is the Maintainer; stuff gets in through pull-requests when and in the order he says so. Fred's RM maintain push rights to the said repository but the convention is that they don't use them except to tag (and sign!) what they have reviewed/are shipping. In WoT and Freetalk's case (should you agree to it), you would be the Maintainer. Makes sense? Would you be happy with something like that? Obviously the repositories names would be stripped from -official and -staging. PS: there's at least 11 persons with push rights on WoT-staging atm, hence my reluctance to just rename it -----------------------------------------
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list Devl@freenetproject.org https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
