| 1 |
On Sun, Dec 9, 2012 at 6:49 PM, Peter Stuge <peter@×××××.se> wrote: |
| 2 |
> As much as I wish that code quality and code review would only |
| 3 |
> require the right process, it doesn't. It all comes down to the |
| 4 |
> people. No matter what the process is, if people want to commit |
| 5 |
> then they will commit. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
[snip] |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> In both projects it has done nothing (and can do nothing) to keep the |
| 10 |
> people who do not care much about code quality from committing shit. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> The only way to filter what goes into the repo is by skilled human. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Skilled humans are rare, and on top of that everyone who cares less |
| 15 |
> about code quality than the skilled human will get pissed off by how |
| 16 |
> (perceived) negative and/or critical and/or conservative and/or |
| 17 |
> demanding the skilled human is. That's also not a lot of fun. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
I think these are the core points of your email. I agree that if |
| 20 |
people have commit access that they -can- still commit shit. I don't |
| 21 |
think this is a case worth worrying about now. We have other areas of |
| 22 |
Gentoo covered by commit-only-if policies and they mostly work. Let's |
| 23 |
start from the assumption that people won't intentionally disobey a |
| 24 |
policy. |
Archives