On 09/19/2015 08:58 PM, Kevin Krammer wrote: > Even using a review tool in the first place is something that the maintainer > asks people to do.
No. We advertise ReviewBoard (and later Phab) as a general interface to throw code at our maintainers. "I don't look at ReviewBoard" is not a socially tenable position in our community in practice, just like "I don't look at GitHub" won't be*. The pressure will be to cover all places. Some people will say they don't want to or can't and abandon one for the other, and we'll have conflict over it and it will affect who develops for KDE and who maintains our products. If your (generic you) position is that people should be comfortable with GitHub and a KDE with only people who are comfortable with GitHub would be a better KDE, then you don't feel that is much of an issue, and that's more or less what some of the people in the discussion propose, unless they trick themselves into ideas like opt-in or two-stage review actually being viable in a general fashion. * = I've explained elsewhere why making GitHub opt-in won't work, but in a nutshell: Repositories don't map to projects; GitHub will spread over time across repo- sitories because it's hard to opt out again; common ownership implicitly means there are no "project X" devs but only KDE devs, or rather that's what we would like to see and optimize for, so GitHub for any repo affects all devs. Cheers, Eike _______________________________________________ kde-community mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-community
