1 |
On 10/27/2016 06:13 AM, Michał Górny wrote: |
2 |
> [snip] |
3 |
> |
4 |
> To be honest, after writing it all down, I started to get the feeling |
5 |
> it isn't necessary after all. The initial idea (and what motivation was |
6 |
> supposed to mean) was that all previous attempts failed because they |
7 |
> either tried to be too specific, force too many style rules or just |
8 |
> never got necessary 'global' to reach all affected parties. |
9 |
> |
10 |
> I'd dare say this GLEP ended up confirming 'third party contributions' |
11 |
> are not that special, we don't need special teams to handle them or |
12 |
> special rules to cover them. |
13 |
> |
14 |
> So yes, it would probably be enough to put such a simple statement |
15 |
> somewhere. The problem is: where? ;-) GLEP seemed like a |
16 |
> straightforward solution to make it global. |
17 |
> |
18 |
|
19 |
Could it be relevant on the git workflow page? I consult that on a |
20 |
regular basis (it's even in my watch list), and accepting/pushing |
21 |
contributions seems like it's right in line with our expected git workflow. |
22 |
|
23 |
Just a thought. I like where you're going with the idea. |
24 |
-- |
25 |
Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer |
26 |
OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net |
27 |
fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C 1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6 |