On Aug 16, 2010, at 7:32 AM, Bryan Duxbury <br...@rapleaf.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Aug 15, 2010 at 8:52 PM, Joe Schaefer <joe_schae...@yahoo.com>wrote: > >> Why not simply make that person a committer and let them hack on >> trunk from the start? >> > > I could agree with this in principle, but I think that there is a practical > reason to do otherwise. In my experience, even once you've got a solid vote > done for a new committer, you end up waiting for weeks for action to be > taken. > > Would it be possible for us to allow anyone access to the /branches dir in > our SVN repo? Then, the de facto way for experimental stuff to happen would > be to cut a branch and get to work. Sorry to prod at a long dead horse, but we'd get this behavior for free with git (and that's how most of the ruby implementation has been developed). When the project first went into apache, the committers discussed (and seemed to be mostly in favor of) using git. But at the time, git was less well established and there was political pressure to stick to SVN. Is this still a sore spot for the ASF? One of the nice things about git is that experimentation can happen easily, and then adding "committers" is effectively just adding the right to merge to trunk. I suppose the danger is adding confusion to what the mainline is, but that seems solvable. Kevin Clark http://glu.ttono.us
