Re: Reenabled account for Tomasz Kloczko

[Federico Mena Quintero <federico ximian com>]

Daniel Veillard <veillard redhat com> writes:

>    BTW, what's the final decision on this ? I remember hearing that
> the HACKING file was the right one, but that for example gnome-libs
> used a different file/scheme. 

The GNOME Programming Guidelines specifies README.CVS; it does not
list HACKING.  However, it does tell you very explicitly to *ask* the
maintainer before committing to a module to which you do not
contribute frequently.

I can update the programming guidelines to include HACKING as the
general way to figure out how to contribute to a module.

(Gnome-libs's HACKING tells you what you need to build the goddamn
thing.  The file that tells you to be a good citizen in
README.cvs-commits instead...  We need to get this fixed.)

>    So where should we detail the CVS access policy ? I think we can decide
> this even if there is no consensus on whether ACLs should be deployed or
> not).

The CVS commit policy is in the GNOME Programming Guidelines:

	if (you are a frequent contributor and the maintainer trusts you)
		go_ahead_commit ();
	else
		mail_the_maintainer ();

  Federico

_______________________________________________
gnome-hackers mailing list
gnome-hackers gnome org
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gnome-hackers