I filed 6600900 contributor grant should not be required to use 
cr.opensolaris.org

Thanks,
Nick

Nicholas Solter wrote:
> Hi Dan,
> 
> Dan Price wrote:
>> On Tue 10 Jul 2007 at 02:22PM, Nicholas Solter wrote:
>>> Dan,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the background. The issue I have with requiring 
>>> contributor status is that it leaves out folks who want to start 
>>> contributing but haven't "proved" themselves yet. Alternatively, it 
>>> suggests that the first time someone wants to make a code change he 
>>> or she should be granted contributor status. Is either of those 
>>> really what we want?
>>
>> That's not true: cr.opensolaris.org is not part of any mandated process.
>> Therefore it is not a barrier to contribution.  It's available for the
>> convenience of contributors, and I maintain it in my spare time.
> 
> I understand that it's not required, but it's a useful tool. It seems to 
> me that we should be making it as easy as possible for new folks to 
> start contributing, which I think would include making tools available 
> to them. Perhaps this hasn't been much of a problem so far, but if we 
> really want to grow the community and encourage contributions from folks 
> outside Sun, we need to make the barriers to entry as low as possible. 
> This tool is a great step in that direction, and I really appreciate all 
> the effort you've put into it. I'm just trying to figure out how it can 
> be even more useful. And let me clarify that I'm not asking you to do 
> this work. If and when we decide to make any changes, I'm happy to help 
> out and hopefully other folks will as well. If it's an "official" part 
> of opensolaris, it shouldn't be only your responsibility to make all the 
> modifications random folks like me request :-)
> 
>>
>>> Couldn't we have a more light-weight anti-spammer mechanism? Perhaps 
>>> we could just keep an "approved" list of people allowed to use the 
>>> tool, and give all core contributors the ability to add folks to the 
>>> list. That way, someone need only convince a core contributor that he 
>>> or she is for real instead of going through the whole contributor 
>>> grant process.
>>
>> The whole point of the grant system is to unlock the ability to do
>> various things.  It seems incredibly duplicative to invent a new
>> "whitelist" of people who get to do various things.  And should I go
>> write a web application to manage that list?
> 
> Yeah, it's not the best solution. But I also don't think it makes sense 
> to use the contributor list just because it's there, even if it's not 
> the right fit. Is allowing all members access to the tool on the table 
> at all? How much of a problem do you think we'd face with abuse of the 
> privilege?
> 
>>
>> I'd rather you advocate for streamlining (from a technology perspective)
>> the distribution of contributor grants.
> 
> Can you explain a bit more about this streamlining? What problems do you 
> see now in the process?
> 
> Thanks,
> Nick
> 
>>
>>         -dp
>>
> 

-- 
Nicholas Solter, Solaris Cluster Development
http://blogs.sun.com/nsolter
_______________________________________________
website-discuss mailing list
[email protected]

Reply via email to