> On 17 February 2012 00:59, Timothy Pearson <kb9vqf@...> > wrote: >>>> Serghei also has commit access. I have been waiting to >>>> merge patches >>>> until I can build test the packages, but with recent changes >>>> I am waiting >>>> on an archive rebuild for Ubuntu. >>> >>> Ok, so you are waiting to start that big wooshing sound. Fair enough. >>> :) >>> >>> But that does not address the core concern: what happens to Trinity >>> should >>> you become unavailable for a long period or forever? >>> >>> Additionally, Serghei is another sharp person but is fairly busy too. >>> His >>> commit access does not change the picture of either of you being too >>> busy >>> to keep patches merging, especially build related patches. >>> >>> Of the non build related patches, many are small and don't need a >>> rocket >>> scientist to decide that merging probably is safe. Should there be >>> others >>> with commit access? >>> >>> Darrell >> >> Probably. I can't enforce it with technical means, but I suppose we >> could >> use the Etherpad to review patches and if two or more non-core devs >> agree >> that the patch looks sane (and doesn't remove functionality, etc.) the >> patch could be pushed. >> >> That leaves the question of who to grant access to. You and Calvin are >> two that come to mind, but I would need poeple to agree that they won't >> "go rogue" and just start pushing unreviewed patches. ;-) >> >> Tim >> > > I would love to review patches. for some time I have been wanting to > set up a review board... but I am sure an etherpad could work just as > well for now! > > again here is where git's branching features come in really really > handy. we could pull those changes into a testing branch and then > merge them right back into the mainline when everything looks well. > > Calvin This still leaves someone having to pick over the patches when they are merged into mainline. Tim