Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Cc: Stefan Schweizer <genstef@g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [experiment] Sunrise try 2
Date: Sun, 25 Jun 2006 05:48:46
Message-Id: 200606250139.51620.vapier@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [experiment] Sunrise try 2 by Edward Catmur
1 On Saturday 24 June 2006 18:54, Edward Catmur wrote:
2 > * Security (from malicious contributors): Glad to see layman will only
3 > track the reviewed/ tree; still, anyone who checks out the sunrise/ tree
4 > (and has it in PORTDIR_OVERLAY) is vulnerable.
5 >
6 > - Remove from the examples any suggestion that one should check out the
7 > whole tree when contributing. Point out that one should not svn up
8 > sunrise/ as part of updating Portage.
9
10 valid point i think
11
12 ive never admined svn repos before, but would it be possible to shut off anon
13 access to the non-reviewed tree ? i think that would cover this issue as
14 people who get bit by bugs in the non-reviewed tree would (and should) be
15 able to just go in and fix it themselves :)
16
17 > * Conflicts between contributors (social): Alice adds an ebuild; Bob
18 > makes a (maybe "obvious") change; Alice thinks the change is incorrect,
19 > and, feeling that the ebuild is her property, reverts the change. A
20 > revert war erupts. Many casualties.
21 >
22 > - Create a social structure to enable Alice and Bob to communicate and
23 > resolve their differences of opinion. Forums? Wiki? IRC? Bugzilla? I
24 > would argue there should be One True location for this to occur; /not/
25 > bugzilla (bugspam); /not/ IRC (impermanence).
26
27 revert wars are retarded on the base level. if people are unable to solve
28 issues via communication channels, i'd say just toss the people involved and
29 the material in question.
30 -mike

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] [experiment] Sunrise try 2 Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o>
[gentoo-dev] Re: [experiment] Sunrise try 2 David Shakaryan <d@×××××.org>