Re: Project Hosting [Was Re: Minutes of the GNOME ...]

[Owen Taylor <otaylor redhat com>]

George <jirka 5z com> writes:

> On Sun, Dec 03, 2000 at 06:44:18PM +0000, Alan Cox wrote:
> > > Although I have some thoughts about the merits of this proposal, I'd 
> > > like to make a meta-point instead: isn't this more properly a 
> > > gnome-hackers discussion, rather than a foundation-list one?
> > 
> > I think a fundamental issue is being overlooked here. If we have no remotely
> > centralised CVS how are translators going to function. How is things like
> > mass document conversion for nautilus going to be organised.
> > 
> > It sounds like for the sake of a few peoples political objection to basic ACLS
> > folk are prepared to screw the entire setup
> 
> My objection to ACLs is not just political.  My objection is also very
> technical.  You just cannot have the amount of cooperation that you can have
> on the GNOME CVS currently if you put ACLs in.  I could very well say:
> 
> "It sounds like for the sake of a few people wanting basic ACLS
>  folk are prepared to screw the entire setup."
> 
> And that is my feeling.

There is a very wide range of possibilities for ACLS. A
decent ACL system would allow matching against rules like:

 allow jirka to commit any module
 allow group translators to commit to gtk+/po
 allow owen, timj to commit to gtk+
 deny all to commit to gtk+

If we had a system in place like that, I think we would have sufficient
flexibility to gain something while not hurting the ability to 
get work done.

And I don't think implementing something like this is that hard
even on top of unmodified CVS.

Regards,
                                        Owen