Re: [opensc-devel] OpenSC write access to main trunk, discussion
Alon Bar-Lev wrote: > This project loses its flexibility, this is not an advantage. I disagree. I find that Git allows all the flexibility developers could ask for. The cry for more committers is misguided. With Git, anyone and everyone is a committer. If commits exist but are not being included in the main repository then it is most likely because they need more work. The effort required to include a perfect patch is next to zero. The question is if a project will insist on perfect patches (e.g. Linux) or if anyone should be allowed to commit anything to the main repo. Inkscape apparently did the latter, and it resulted in a massive janitorial workload to clean up the horrible mess that had been created. No fun. Consider also that addition of commits without review will quite likely introduce bugs which would have been discovered by peers. I think this fact alone is reason enough for OpenSC to not include a single line which hasn't been reviewed rather thoroughly. The review process could even be formalized and made into a strict requirement before writes to the main repo are possible. I understand that Gooze and others have strong interest in inclusion of changes into OpenSC. The only way to make that happen is what Douglas described; put in the work, and create perfect patches. Write access to some repository is not the issue. The whole world already has Git write access. If someone needs help with publishing a repository then feel free to let me know. If you have prepared a patch which you think is perfect but noone is responding then give it a thorough review yourself, and try again. Also try discussing the change, explaining it in an email can be a great way to produce a better commit message, which is very important for anyone who is doing review. Note that review does not mean to browse through the change and say "looks ok", but it means to understand the effects of every changed line. This can require a lot of context and/or research. You can help by that commit be included by doing review. You doing review is infinitely more important than you having write access to some repository. //Peter ___ opensc-devel mailing list opensc-devel@lists.opensc-project.org http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
Re: [opensc-devel] OpenSC write access to main trunk, discussion
Hello, On Thu, Feb 16, 2012 at 11:53 PM, Douglas E. Engert wrote: > The way forward is not necessarily more commiters, but a plan > for the next release and some action. Well, once there was maintainer for each subject, so if maintainer of (in this case) ePass2003 decides to put a specific implementation it should be OK. If another one is working on SM and it effects only specific drivers, why not? For example, I don't think I need to beg to include the removal of the libltdl dependency should be trivial even if I got this only 99%. This project loses its flexibility, this is not an advantage. You can decide which feature goes to which milestone, and cooperate with people within different branches. Alon. ___ opensc-devel mailing list opensc-devel@lists.opensc-project.org http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
Re: [opensc-devel] OpenSC write access to main trunk, discussion
On 2/15/2012 5:39 AM, Jean-Michel Pouré - GOOZE wrote: > Dear all, > > I just got in contact with Stef Walter, who is integrating libp11-glue > into Gnome and Gnome keyring. > > He outlines that libp11-glue needs this patch: > PKCS#11 module shouldn't fail if mlock doesn't work > http://www.opensc-project.org/opensc/ticket/389 > > This patch and other waiting patches raise the question of OpenSC > guidance and the need to have more commiters to OpenSC main GIT. > > Martin, would you agree to add Viktor as a major OpenSC GIT member with > power to apply patches to main GIT trunk? I don't want to be paranoid, > but we need a more flexible approach rather than just Martin and Ludovic > applying and reviewing patches. > > We discussed that at FOSDEM in a small audience, but I would like to > discuss that issue in public and have your own opinion. Who would like > OpenSC GITHUB to be REALLY in control of the community? Martin and > Ludovic, could you agree to open your group to other members of the > community? The question is not so much who is on the commiter list, but do commits get made when needed, and who decides a commit is ready and should be made. There are minor fixes, like 389 that is 4 months old with an additional fix 2 months ago, and looks like it needs to be made, as well as major changes such as the SM, ePass2003, and the ECDH modifications. Personally, I am quite interested in getting the ECDH in to the next release with or without the SM code and am willing to rebase the modifications as needed. I believe the ECDH has been ready for months. Viktor pulled the ECDH modifications into his SM on October 4, 2011 and he also pulled in the ePass2003 on January 29. The way forward is not necessarily more commiters, but a plan for the next release and some action. So can we consider adding ePass2003, SM, and ECDH to the next release as these are already being tested together. If giving Viktor commit authority would speed up the inclusion of both small and larger modifications, it would be OK with me. If we can get these included without giving him commit authority, that would be OK with me too. But we need action. > > Community, please advice and discuss this issue. > > Kind regards, > Jean-Michel > > > > > ___ > opensc-devel mailing list > opensc-devel@lists.opensc-project.org > http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel -- Douglas E. Engert Argonne National Laboratory 9700 South Cass Avenue Argonne, Illinois 60439 (630) 252-5444 ___ opensc-devel mailing list opensc-devel@lists.opensc-project.org http://www.opensc-project.org/mailman/listinfo/opensc-devel
