On December 10, 2009 12:05:21 Jeff Mitchell wrote: > On 12/10/2009 1:01 PM, Ian Monroe wrote: > >> Why is it a blocker? What's actually wrong with it? What about it means > >> that people that need or want merge request notifications can't get it, > >> even if it means they have to ask one of the developers of the app, > >> > >> which makes sense given that they could then change the merge request > >> status (thus assuming a small amount of a "developer" role)? > > > > How it does make sense to receive emails they have to have to be able > > to change merge request statuses? Coupling the two makes no sense at > > all actually. > > Well, right. That's why I said that it would be better if the Gitorious > guys further relaxed the coupling of the access controls and separated > them out from the groups they're currently in. > > However, I don't agree with the assertion that things are in this awful, > worse-than-nothing state. Yes, they could be better. But it's halfway > there. And you should keep in mind that it's not like users are losing > something by not being able to get these merge request emails right now, > because we didn't have this capability before -- so it's not like we had > it, and then lost it. The merge requests themselves are still public, > they're just not getting notification in their email inboxes.
oh, and there's an rss feed available too if you just want to follow them without the bother of joining the group. -- This message brought to you by eevil bananas and the number 3. www.chani3.com
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Kde-scm-interest mailing list Kde-scm-interest@kde.org https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-scm-interest
