Re: newer and improveder new and improved oaf-slay

[Maciej Stachowiak <mjs eazel com>]

JP Rosevear <jpr ximian com> writes:

> On 13 May 2001 13:59:17 -0700, Maciej Stachowiak wrote:
> > > Indeed, oaf/MAINTAINERS says:
> > > 
> > > ...
> > > Test code     : Michael Meeks <michael helixcode com>
> 
> > I don't mind you committing to the test code without asking, I'd just
> > prefer you not instruct others to commit their own changes.
> 
> I'm unclear how this functions in practice - what if Michael took the
> patch, applied it to his own tree and submitted in himself, that would
> count as ok? 
> 
> Is this an attempt to not have to go chasing down who gave approval for
> the patch?

I don't understand. It's totally normal in various projects for commit
priveleges and patch review priveleges to be separate. No one else
who's worked on OAF has had a problem understanding this difference.

Let me use an analogy. Let's say I tell you that you can borrow money
from the cash box in my sock drawer whenever you need it. And then you
tell one of your friends he can borrow money from me too. Now, I'm
going to get upset, because I only gave you personally permission to
borrow money from me. Now you could argue, "but what if I borrowed the
money myself and then gave it to the other friend." Now, maybe there
are some situations where that's the right thing to do, but maybe
other times it's stretching the rules. Maybe if you're not sure, it's
a good idea to ask. Certainly if I'm around and your other friend asks
for money and you say, "Sure, go take it from Maciej's sock drawer"
rather than letting me answer, it comes off as somewhat rude.

Or to put it another way, it's the difference between a "write" ACL
and an "admin" ACL.

Love,

Maciej