> 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