1 |
On 06/22/2013 03:42 AM, Robin H. Johnson wrote: |
2 |
> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 09:06:30PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
3 |
>> On Friday 21 June 2013 20:26:03 Robin H. Johnson wrote: |
4 |
>>> On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 08:17:38PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
5 |
>>>>> I'm not going into review systems here at all, I'm simply trying to |
6 |
>>>>> have a policy of what changes are welcomed/blocked WITHOUT interaction |
7 |
>>>>> from the listed maintainer(s) of a given package/herd. |
8 |
>>>> |
9 |
>>>> add a new field to metadata.xml that declares the state. make it an enum: |
10 |
>>>> ANYTHING_GOES (the default) |
11 |
>>>> REQUIRES_HERD |
12 |
>>>> REQUIRES_MAINTAINER |
13 |
>>> |
14 |
>>> I wish it was that easy. |
15 |
>>> |
16 |
>>> Despite being ANYTHING_GOES on most of my packages, I don't want people |
17 |
>>> to add giant features like qmail patchbombs; so we need to figure out |
18 |
>>> something like the Debian NMU listing of what's acceptable. |
19 |
>> the maintainers intent has to be machine codable |
20 |
> So we have the following facets of NMU permissions: |
21 |
> Who |
22 |
> What |
23 |
> |
24 |
>>> Does a version bump count as an acceptable trivial change? |
25 |
>> that's up to the maintainer |
26 |
> This needs to be in the above data: |
27 |
> |
28 |
> So we have: |
29 |
> Who = {ANYTHING_GOES, REQUIRES_DEV, REQUIRES_HERD, REQUIRES_MAINTAINER} |
30 |
> What = {NONE, TRIVIAL, MINOR_FEATURES, VERSION_BUMP, MAJOR_FEATURES} |
31 |
> |
32 |
> So most of my packages might be coded with: |
33 |
> <nmu-policy who="REQUIRES_DEV" what="VERSION_BUMP" /> |
34 |
> <nmu-policy who="REQUIRES_HERD" what="MAJOR_FEATURES" /> |
35 |
> |
36 |
> - If you're a developer, you can do trivial fixes, add minor features, |
37 |
> bump the version. |
38 |
> - If you're in the herd, you can add major features. |
39 |
> |
40 |
|
41 |
Sounds cool. |
42 |
|
43 |
I don't think we need a GLEP or council vote on that. |