On 06/16/2016 12:35 AM, Alexander Berntsen wrote: > On 16/06/16 09:24, Daniel Campbell wrote: >> To touch on the user repo part.. can't it be as simple as adding >> one requirement to user repos that wish to be considered as >> curated? > >> Create a "gentoo-ci" branch or something else, and the maintainer >> of each repo can update said branch when QA 'approves' a given >> commit. Then others can 'subscribe' to that branch and development >> remains unhindered by the QA process in a distributed format. > I'm not sure what you mean by unhindered. I didn't mean for my idea to > create any hindrance. My idea was to fork their repository, and have > some dev(s) take the responsibility of merging from the user. Or, we > could do what Exherbo does, just let them carry on and trust them, and > only (perhaps temporarily) remove their repository if we find them > guilty of some wrongdoing. > > While I'm not axiomatically opposed to your idea, I think it may > create noise if everybody makes a gentoo-ci branch, and most of them > are close to worthless. > I guess what I mean is these outside developers could continue hacking and/or breaking things, or whatever else, without worrying about their "official" branch. We could have a standard that assumes Gentoo pulls their 'master' branch and they keep other stuff in 'dev', or some other model. We'll need to decide on *some* branch, but putting it in writing would make things clearer for prospective repo maintainers. -- Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C 1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
