Yanni Chiu wrote: > > I don't think using global write is the right way to fix the problem. > Why not? What is the concrete negative scenario that it creates? There are currently many projects that have this setup, and of course it would be up to each admin.
Has anybody out there experienced problems with r/w repos that caused them to change to read-only? That would make a case for caution. Yanni Chiu wrote: > > How about a SqS usage policy: > - the project admin(s) are responsible for keeping their email contact > up-to date > - periodically (monthly?), project admins are ping'ed. If no > acknowledgement is received after three attempts, then the project admin > reverts to the community > - any community member can then ask to become the project admin > I like this as an addition, but it doesn't solve the primary issue of making it easy for people to contribute. I know that currently, every time I go through the process of contacting someone to apply changes, I think, "this is too hard." I'm sure that many fixes out there are lost because of the private development model. How about this: * As you suggest above: projects revert to community after x time * there is an inbox-like place for every project (or one for all external projects), where community contributions can go. This way, the latest code is always available, and it is separate from the owners code Sean -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Community-Development-a-suggestion-tp2224670p2224980.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com. _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
