On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 10:01 PM, Jameson Rollins <jrollins at finestructure.net> wrote: > On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 21:45:47 +0300, Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras at > gmail.com> wrote: >> I think many people agree notmuch mainline has been rather slow. So >> I'm proposing to have notmuch-next branch, either on github or >> gitorious (please vote). >> >> More than one person should have write access to this repo, but some >> guidelines should be in place. I propose that patches should be >> signed-off-by at least another person in the mailing list before >> pushing. It would be nice if this is how the mainline branch works, >> but we don't need to wait for that to happen. We need to vote on who >> are the people to have write access. > > I think this generally sounds like a fine idea, but I don't see why we > need a single central repo that multiple people need access to. ?The > whole point of git is to allow for distributed development without need > for a central repo.
And yet, git is hosted in a central repo. Different projects have different needs, and this one seems to need a place to cook up patches, having multiple committers there seems like it would work. Note that this wouldn't be the main repo, it would be preparing stage. > In this case, folks can just merge the patches they're interested in > into a "next" branch in their own personal repos, publish them where > ever they want, and then every body can just keep their "next" branches > synced with each other. ?As consensus is reached, the next release will > emerge. That might also work, it would be the first project I see doing that though. But what I worry is the ordering of the patches; we might have applied the same patches, but they would appear as totally different branches to a 3rd party, and of course merging other people's 'next' branches would create a total mess. There should be one repo that has the latest and greatest 'next' branch that everybody can rebase into, like the current 'master'. -- Felipe Contreras