Re: Reenabled account for Tomasz Kloczko

[Daniel Veillard <veillard redhat com>]

On Sun, Mar 11, 2001 at 07:05:49PM +0100, Tomasz Kloczko wrote:
> On 11 Mar 2001, Owen Taylor wrote:
> 
> > 
> > I just noticed that Tomasz's CVS account was still disabled.
> > 
> > Since I think there was general agreement on reenabling it on the
> > principle of "everybody is allowed a few mistakes", I've turned it
> > back on.

  Thanks, I think I suggested reenabling it the next day.

> Ones more I want apologize Daniel and all others for waste of time ..

  It's okay, I know you did it in good faith and there were good technical
reasons to try to do what you did. It was just misplaced.

> I think maybe some partial solution for prevent on not technical level
> cases like mine can be prepare document in each module with rule (for
> peoples not listed for example in module AUTHORS files) for consult on
> proper list or with maintainer each change. IMHO try promote make good
> habit consult changes on public mail lists (like for gtk+/glib modules) by
> developers not lited in AUTHORS files will can prevent (or beat to
> acceptable level) bad commits without prepare cvs ACLs and probalby in
> loger time allow also keep on good level techinical contacts between
> developers (?)

   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. 
   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).

Daniel

-- 
Daniel Veillard      | Red Hat Network http://redhat.com/products/network/
veillard redhat com  | libxml Gnome XML XSLT toolkit  http://xmlsoft.org/
http://veillard.com/ | Rpmfind RPM search engine http://rpmfind.net/