I proposed this because I think it is a solid flow and in alignment with other stable opensource projects that I contribute to including one under the FSF complexity.
It is NOT a rush and I don't think it is out of line. Multiple +1 were given, so I don't think it's that far off what will work. I think much of the other discussions are far to complex, will prevent contributions and ignore technologies in favor of theory and principle. I will be stepping away from all further discussion on the work flow topic as I have soured on it and don't have a real vote beyond proposing it. As I said I trust the people I this project so it will workout. When there is a flow for contributing please announce it and I will try to contribute my code. --Brennan On Sun, Dec 22, 2019, 3:46 PM Gregory Nutt <spudan...@gmail.com> wrote: > There are several things I don't like about this proposal: > > - It is in complete conflict with everything we have discussed about > the commit workflow > > - I think is is suggest out of panic. We have plenty of times to do > things right or to do things better. There will be no pressing need > until the work week begins after the New Year > > - It is an emergency measure and absolutely must not become the > default workflow. If we put this in place, how do we get rid of > it? Perhaps it should expire automatically after two weeks? > > I will have to vote -1 on this proposal with out some assurance that it > is not a disease that we cannot recover from /EASILY/ without another > vote. I would vote 0 if there there is such an assurance. > > Greg > > >
