On 09.06.2015, at 00:12, Stephen Connolly <[email protected]> 
wrote:

> I actually think our community has grown by virtue of being liberal with the 
> commit bit.

I don't think this proposal disputes that, or wants to _really_ limit what you 
can do if you request it.

However, I agree with Kostya (a rare enough event :-) ) that the current system 
of giving everyone commit access everywhere by default, doesn't help, but harm.

> I can see people being precious with the commit bit for "their" project all 
> over the interwebs... I am sometimes guilty of the same myself if I don't pay 
> attention... But one thing that Jenkins has thought me is that OSS works 
> better when you are liberal with the commit bit.

Seems a bit like a straw man argument. Properly executed we wouldn't even need 
to limit significantly what permissions we hand out. People need to ask today 
already to get their initial permissions and that mostly works fairly well. We 
could also add some automation to it to make it even more seamless: Ask, and if 
nobody objects for a few days, you're in. We just wouldn't give them 
permissions to commit to the 1000+ repos they didn't even request. I don't 
think that a significant number of people use their commit access to more that 
3-5 repos, or frequently change what they need access to. And those few 
developers that do are known and can be safely excluded from this rule.

> It can be hard enough to let people feel empowered enough to cut releases on 
> a repo where the maintainer has gone awol (eg violations after Peter 
> relocated to Colorado with job title that leaves him less concerned with the 
> details of the CI server)
> 
> Or even get people realise that they are effectively now a co-maintainer of 
> the project.

Could this be related to the fact that hundreds of users have the same 
authority to release the project as you have?

> I worry that limiting the commit bit would harm the community.

I worry that not limiting the commit bit will harm the community. I provided a 
(luckily hypothetical) example in the May 13 governance meeting[1]. We ran out 
of time before we could really discuss this, unfortunately.

1: 
http://meetings.jenkins-ci.org/jenkins/2015/jenkins.2015-05-13-18.07.log.html 
from 19:03-19:16

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Jenkins Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/5F318403-3453-48A6-B444-A8A70ED37A7B%40beckweb.net.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to