On 2/14/2014 7:52 AM, Edward K. Ream wrote:
Should we restrict access to the git repo? Your thoughts, please.
Edward
Define 'restrict access'. As it stands now, only those in the
'leo-editor' organization have write access. We could change that, but
it's currently in the same state it was over on bzr/launchpad, with a
lower user count.
If, for example, we changed it so that only you had write access, I feel
like development would stagnate, as we'd need your approval to push
things like plugins, quick bugfixes, etc. I think, from experience with
other projects, that having a single person with absolute control over a
repo leads to significant delays in getting new code in master.
A middle ground would be, say, four or five developers with write access
to master, and everyone else works with pull requests... but I kind of
dislike that idea too...
Leo isn't, in my opinion, an unstable piece of software that would
benefit from the walled garden approach. The day-to-day state of the
code in the repo is perfectly stable for power-users (due to the
extensive unit tests and such), and often has important bugfixes that
the previous release version doesn't. I think the relatively open
approach to handling repo permissions on launchpad has contributed to
this, and I can't imagine walling of Leo's git repo would have a
positive effect.
Just my $0.02.
-->Jake
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"leo-editor" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
