On Sat, Dec 12, 2009 at 06:21:31PM +0100, Thiago Macieira wrote: > Em Sábado 12. Dezembro 2009, às 17.35.52, Oswald Buddenhagen escreveu: > > installing such a system also doesn't preclude allowing overrides for > > urgent cases (say, obvious build breakage and no maintainer is to be > > found on IRC). at qtdf, we have GIT_FORCE=yes-please to enable forced > > pushes in justified cases. > > And this relies on trusting people not to abuse. The hook checks and the > override were created to avoid mistakes with wide-reaching constraints (the > privacy issue). > yes, but we don't want to put there an inpenetrable lock anyway. we just want to make the policy obvious, and help "living it". imagine such a message from the pre-receive hook:
************************************************************************ Whoopsie! Looks like this project has chosen to restrict commit access. You have the following options to proceed from here: 1) run 'git magic-push'. This will submit your patch(es) for review and integration by the maintainers. 2) run 'GIT_OVERRIDE=acl git push'. This will permit you to do the push nonetheless. Before doing that, consider the following: * Is your patch really that urgent? * Is there really no maintainer reachable on short notice (IRC)? * Is your hotfix really correct? Did you have it reviewed by anyone? * Abuse of this facility WILL have consequences. ************************************************************************ should serve the purpose, no? > But we also have a rule of reviewing commits, yet there are still a > lot of unreviewed commits going in. > well, yes. but it's usually people committing to the code they are responsible for, so it's not directly related to acls. it's way harder to get that issue fixed. _______________________________________________ Kde-scm-interest mailing list [email protected] https://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-scm-interest
