Re: [Dri-devel] Re: Invitation for public discussion about the future of X

On Don, 2003-03-20 at 22:53, José Fonseca wrote:
> On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 02:48:21PM +0000, Alan Hourihane wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 20, 2003 at 11:37:34 +0000, Keith Whitwell wrote:
> > > 	- Extend CVS access to regular contributors.  Use scripts or 
> > > 	whatever to control access to subtrees if you want.
> > 
> > This comes up from time to time, and I'm sure will get discussed even more.
> > I know there have been offers to others for CVS commit access, and some
> > have refused and some have accepted. The consensus of who gets commit
> > access has always been - if they show competance at sending patches in,
> > then after a period of time, no doubt they'll get it. It's the same as
> > the DRI, but with more of a prolonged period of evaluating that persons
> > patches. I guess this 'prolonged' period, is the stickling point for most.
>  
> Why not simply have a second CVS repository, where most development
> would take place under, while the current repository would be the one
> used for (pre-/post-) releases with coarse-grain commits. Like stable
> and development branches, but with the branches being on different
> repositories.

Why a second repository then, instead of just branches, and maybe
restricting most developers to commit to branches and only allow some to
commit to the trunk, for example? I don't see much advantage in a
separate repository (but I may simply be missing it, clues appreciated
:), but it makes merges more difficult.


-- 
Earthling Michel Dänzer (MrCooper)/ Debian GNU/Linux (powerpc) developer
XFree86 and DRI project member   /  CS student, Free Software enthusiast