| 1 |
On Wed, Jul 06, 2022 at 02:42:34PM +0200, Florian Schmaus wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 04/07/2022 17.27, David Seifert wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Ultimately, all these things really matter when only the defaults |
| 4 |
> > change. Turn-right-on-red in the US is such a thing, because unless |
| 5 |
> > otherwise stated, it's the norm. Knowing our devbase, with roughly 75% |
| 6 |
> > mostly AWOL and barely reading the MLs, I don't think this idea will |
| 7 |
> > bring about the desired change. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> This sounds like you assume that the majority of Gentoo devs are OK with |
| 10 |
> other people making changes to their packages. This very well could be |
| 11 |
> true, but without an indication you never know if the maintainer feels |
| 12 |
> this way. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I was on vacation when this thread started, so that's why I'm responding |
| 15 |
now. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
The default assumption according to the dev manual is that maintainers |
| 18 |
are not ok with others touching their packages without permission except |
| 19 |
for very trivial changes. IMO this is the safer default. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
https://devmanual.gentoo.org/general-concepts/package-maintainers/index.html |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> > Instead, we should really just go for |
| 26 |
> > the <non-maintainer-commits-disallowed/> tag, because my feeling is that |
| 27 |
> > the default will be that most maintainers don't mind non-maintainer |
| 28 |
> > commits, except a select few territorial ones. |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> It appears that we have at least two options here: |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> A) Establish that the default is non-maintainer-commits-welcome, and |
| 33 |
> introduce a <non-maintainer-commits-disallowed/> metadata element. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
This would go against the default from the dev manual, so if we go with |
| 36 |
it, which I do not recommend, we should fix the dev manual. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
> B) Declare the default to be unspecified and introduce two metadata |
| 39 |
> elements: <non-maintainer-commits-welcome/> and |
| 40 |
> <non-maintainer-commits-disallowed/>. |
| 41 |
> |
| 42 |
> I think you are proposing A) here, but please correct me if I am wrong. |
| 43 |
> |
| 44 |
> Personally I would tend to B). But I have no strong opinion on this, as |
| 45 |
> long as some kind of signalling is established. |
| 46 |
> |
| 47 |
> How do others feel about this? |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
I would suggest the default be consistent with the dev manual and we add |
| 50 |
a <non-maintainer-commits-welcome/> element. |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
William |
Archives