Self committing... allowed or not?

[Matthew Seaman]

On 04/08/2015 17:28, Loganaden Velvindron wrote:
> I would like to know how hard would it be for our FreeBSD experts to
> hack SVN to allow port maintainers commit to individual ports to speed
> up the process :p ?

Technically that's probably not too difficult.  Debian has a system like
that, using PGP signatures for authentication, which we could probably
steal^Wcopy without too much trouble.

The real kicker though is about maintaining code quality.  This is
pretty much why committers exist: they are people who have shown
competence in dealing with src / ports / docs whatever and have
demonstrated they can maintain standards.  One of a committers primary
functions is to either fix or get the submitter to fix problems with
submissions before committing.

Now, it's almost certainly true that many port maintainers who aren't
already committers would be perfectly competent at updating their own
ports.  Chances are though if such a maintainer has been sufficiently
active and has submitted enough to establish their competence then
they'd be a definite prospect as a full-blown committer anyhow. ie. if
you're good enough to commit changes to your own ports, then you're
pretty much good enough to commit changes to any port, so you might as
well have a ports commit bit.

	Cheers,

	Matthew





-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 971 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-ports/attachments/20150804/0047cb17/attachment.bin>