On Don, 2003-03-20 at 22:53, José Fonseca wrote: > On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 02:48:21PM +0000, Alan Hourihane wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 11:37:34 +0000, Keith Whitwell wrote: > > > - Extend CVS access to regular contributors. Use scripts or > > > whatever to control access to subtrees if you want. > > > > This comes up from time to time, and I'm sure will get discussed even more. > > I know there have been offers to others for CVS commit access, and some > > have refused and some have accepted. The consensus of who gets commit > > access has always been - if they show competance at sending patches in, > > then after a period of time, no doubt they'll get it. It's the same as > > the DRI, but with more of a prolonged period of evaluating that persons > > patches. I guess this 'prolonged' period, is the stickling point for most. > > Why not simply have a second CVS repository, where most development > would take place under, while the current repository would be the one > used for (pre-/post-) releases with coarse-grain commits. Like stable > and development branches, but with the branches being on different > repositories.
Why a second repository then, instead of just branches, and maybe restricting most developers to commit to branches and only allow some to commit to the trunk, for example? I don't see much advantage in a separate repository (but I may simply be missing it, clues appreciated :), but it makes merges more difficult. -- Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper)/ Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc) developer XFree86 and DRI project member / CS student, Free Software enthusiast ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: Tablet PC. Does your code think in ink? You could win a Tablet PC. Get a free Tablet PC hat just for playing. What are you waiting for? http://ads.sourceforge.net/cgi-bin/redirect.pl?micr5043en _______________________________________________ Dri-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/dri-devel
