1 |
> On 3/24/06, Andres Loeh <kosmikus@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> > Here's a list of things that I think are essential or highly helpful to |
3 |
> > our working process: |
4 |
> > |
5 |
> > * We should be allowed to continue using darcs for our version management. |
6 |
> > If that's not possible on Gentoo infra, we should be allowed to host on |
7 |
> > another machine and just have a pointer or ChangeLog on o.g.o. |
8 |
> |
9 |
> Unless I've missed it, no-one else has spoken up and suggested what |
10 |
> the second VCS should be. I'll have a play with darcs as soon as I |
11 |
> can, and talk with infra about whether we can support it or not. Is |
12 |
> it okay if I come and pick your brains to help with this? |
13 |
|
14 |
Sure. Best place to find any of us is #gentoo-haskell ... |
15 |
|
16 |
> > * It should be possible for us to assign commit permissions to any people |
17 |
> > we think are qualified without any formalities and delay. |
18 |
> |
19 |
> Absolutely. This is one of the corner-stones of the project. |
20 |
|
21 |
Great. |
22 |
|
23 |
> > It would work, of course, and it would help prevent certain complaints, |
24 |
> > but it's not absolutely necessary. If "on request" is chosen, it's also |
25 |
> > important that read access can be given by us without any delay, i.e., |
26 |
> > without going through any formal process. |
27 |
> |
28 |
> The only formallity is that the request will need to come from the |
29 |
> project lead listed on your project's page under |
30 |
> www.g.o/proj/<lang>/<project>/. I need to talk to infra first, but in |
31 |
> principle I don't see a problem with project leads being allowed to |
32 |
> delegate that power. |
33 |
|
34 |
At the moment, Haskell is only a herd and a team, not a project. But this |
35 |
is certainly something that can be addressed, should it be necessary to |
36 |
change that. |
37 |
|
38 |
Cheers, |
39 |
Andres |