It seems that everyone who is for this has made a very good case. I took
a bit of time to play devil's advocate to see if I could find good
enough objections for our usage but I think everything is covered.
Just to check.. is this is a decision we can make independently of the IPMC?
Anyway +1 to the suggestion.
Cheers,
Gary
On 08/01/13 11:20, Greg Stein wrote:
We made the change just a week or so ago, so yeah: no metrics yet.
Branko put it well: why not remove technical barriers. If an Allura dev
shows up with a patch/tweak, and we say "ooh. nice", then our devs merely
say +1 and the contributor commits. No ACL or LDAP changes. No patch
downloaded/applied. Just an email saying "thanks".
This is version control. Anything can be rolled back. I like to turn the
question around: why *should* we erect technical barriers? (yes, we still
have social barriers, and expect people to engage)
(obviously: +1 to the OP)
Cheers,
-g
On Jan 8, 2013 4:28 AM, "Peter Koželj" <[email protected]> wrote:
I guess the SVN's change probably isn't long enough to have any feedback on
how well that works,
but I do agree that this is an option worth trying. I guess we
can always switch back if it does not work.
Peter
On 7 January 2013 22:58, Joe Dreimann <[email protected]>
wrote:
I see a far bigger risk of not receiving contributions than of receiving
poor quality / malicious contributions at this point. If this is a proven
approach for svn, I have no objection to the change.
- Joe
________________________
@jdreimann - Twitter
Sent from my phone
On 7 Jan 2013, at 21:06, Branko Čibej <[email protected]> wrote:
There was recently a long debate on the (private) members@ list about
lowering technical barriers for commit access. As a result, the
Subversion project has already changed its access control settings so
that any ASF committer can make changes to the Subversion source code.
I propose that Bloodhound does the same.
I have to point out that making this change would /not/ mean that
everyone has license to fiddle with the Bloodhound source code without
prior consent from the BH dev community. Project member status must
still be earned, but the proposed change means that contributions from
ASF committers would use up a lot less of the BH developers' time.
The proponents of this change are hoping that eventually, most of the
ASF projects will move to a more relaxed access control model.
Bloodhound, having a relatively small and homogeneous community, would
likely profit by lowering the bar for new contributors.
-- Brane
--
Branko Čibej
Director of Subversion | WANdisco | www.wandisco.com
