lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Dec]   [27]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: The direction linux is taking
On Thu, Dec 27, 2001 at 12:45:08PM -0800, Dana Lacoste wrote:
> why use the SCM if the features it gives are being supplied
> in a completely acceptable manner by the maintainer?
> If Linus is doing it on his own, and you're suggesting that
> he set the SCM up so that he does it all on his own in the
> end anyways, why should he add an extremely obtrusive step
> (SCM) to the mix? Why should it be any harder on his day
> to day methodology that he's already comfortable with?

Merging is much easier.
Tracking of patches is much easier.
Access control is much easier.
Etc.

> (If, on the other hand, we allowed multiple committers
> and access-controlled maintainer lists, then SCM would
> be beautiful! but this isn't FreeBSD :) :) :) :) :)

Actually, BK can definitely do that. In fact, that's basically exactly what
we have on the hosting service for the PPC tree. There are a list of people
who are administrators, a list of committers, as well as read only access.
The admins are also committers if they want to be, the admins also get to
control who is and is not a committer.

And you dream up as complicated an access control model as you want. We
can do pretty much any model you can describe. Try me, describe a work
flow that you think would be useful, I'll write up how to do it and stick
it on a web page and you can throw stones at it and see if it breaks.
--
---
Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:14    [W:0.041 / U:0.360 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site