| 1 |
Hi Stuart. |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> > dcoutts has described the current practice we use in the Haskell |
| 4 |
> > team, but that doesn't necessarily mean that it's the only practice |
| 5 |
> > that would work for us. I can imagine that if we can come up with |
| 6 |
> > reasonable policies for o.g.o, we can switch to a slightly different |
| 7 |
> > (i.e., more public) scheme ... |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> I want to thank both you and Duncan for your explaination of how the |
| 10 |
> Haskell overlay works. I would love to get your overlay onto |
| 11 |
> overlays.g.o, without disrupting the working practices that you've |
| 12 |
> found successful. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Which means we need to take another look at the vision of all overlays |
| 15 |
> being publically readable, because having a non-public overlay seems |
| 16 |
> to be a key part of what you're already doing. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Not really. I discussed this with Duncan and we're perfectly ok with |
| 19 |
a publically readable repo. In fact, our overlay is currently publically |
| 20 |
readable. It's just not very well-known or advertised. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
If we change the situation, we'll have to write up a few guidelines specific |
| 23 |
to our repository. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Here's a list of things that I think are essential or highly helpful to |
| 26 |
our working process: |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
* We should be allowed to continue using darcs for our version management. |
| 29 |
If that's not possible on Gentoo infra, we should be allowed to host on |
| 30 |
another machine and just have a pointer or ChangeLog on o.g.o. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
* It should be possible for us to assign commit permissions to any people |
| 33 |
we think are qualified without any formalities and delay. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
> If the overlay's changelog is included on o.g.o's front-page, and the |
| 36 |
> wiki / GuideXML site is publically readable, but we just disallow |
| 37 |
> anonymous access to the overlay itself (only if requested, this |
| 38 |
> wouldn't be the default setup) ... how would that work for you? |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
It would work, of course, and it would help prevent certain complaints, |
| 41 |
but it's not absolutely necessary. If "on request" is chosen, it's also |
| 42 |
important that read access can be given by us without any delay, i.e., |
| 43 |
without going through any formal process. |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
Cheers, |
| 46 |
Andres |
Archives