From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (ffbox0-bg.ffmpeg.org [79.124.17.100]) by master.gitmailbox.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F7EE454AC for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 19:03:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.1.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTP id CCA6268BD9D; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 21:03:43 +0200 (EET) Received: from w4.tutanota.de (w4.tutanota.de [81.3.6.165]) by ffbox0-bg.mplayerhq.hu (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7DFBD68BCDC for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 21:03:37 +0200 (EET) Received: from tutadb.w10.tutanota.de (unknown [192.168.1.10]) by w4.tutanota.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 324E210602DF for ; Mon, 30 Jan 2023 19:03:34 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1675105414; s=s1; d=lynne.ee; h=From:From:To:To:Subject:Subject:Content-Description:Content-ID:Content-Type:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Cc:Date:Date:In-Reply-To:In-Reply-To:MIME-Version:MIME-Version:Message-ID:Message-ID:Reply-To:References:References:Sender; bh=OsqhmvOD2vWzALSNhHTL2HPKG2bAWjw+5K2pC+kyTh8=; b=dZ+ueq1l6W5KuV1VoPoEvpQ6+LrDKHVJj9jpynz/OTdoiLHVDodc9wDoGfoRbjga VjcnFe3QMMecPmwJ/nZOtas1+uZXe1QZqQDlq0WCmgajNb6Wwn0RahLkIcXuwb9Ke7d lzB+FhFkzKcrN17UaoUNwekJJk5GPqPToLiD3MP5iXhaJjNoe44EP/96j5PzaRmjdz/ j+ieBdm0aWThEhKZIBsyI4HMmeQP1zWt+I8AWmOU4xO/OvhzEGEheTCalPu/XSNsfer qiSlhbSvA8lONe9soGMOFThSy0PJ7VsClvOgOBgruD3fiPg8KU2fSB81je8unK+hwrv SWJ9PGMg0Q== Date: Mon, 30 Jan 2023 20:03:34 +0100 (CET) From: Lynne To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <20230130164931.GJ1949656@pb2> References: <20230130164931.GJ1949656@pb2> MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: [FFmpeg-devel] [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: add a separate list for those with push access X-BeenThere: ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: FFmpeg development discussions and patches List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: FFmpeg development discussions and patches Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: ffmpeg-devel-bounces@ffmpeg.org Sender: "ffmpeg-devel" Archived-At: List-Archive: List-Post: Jan 30, 2023, 17:49 by michael@niedermayer.cc: > On Thu, Dec 15, 2022 at 02:13:49AM +0100, Lynne wrote: > >> This list is incomplete, and just contains those I could see >> while looking at the recent git log. If it looks like I've forgotten you, I definitely haven't! >> We may complete the list at a later date. >> >> This makes it such that those who add themselves to MAINTAINERS do not >> get push access by default, but rather, they have to request it >> explicitly in a different commit. This used to be the situation >> before it was changed at the start of this year and is pretty much what >> everyone expects. >> >> Patch attached. >> >> MAINTAINERS | 15 +++++++++++++++ >> 1 file changed, 15 insertions(+) >> 6a083061d75f6655771bde377f96aadad19b21c6 0001-MAINTAINERS-add-a-separate-list-for-those-with-push-.patch >> From 5c353412a25fd46c5077e5cf92ddfd6532eb46cb Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 >> From: Lynne >> Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2022 02:05:00 +0100 >> Subject: [PATCH] MAINTAINERS: add a separate list for those with push access >> >> This list is incomplete, and just contains those I could remember >> while looking at the recent git log. >> We may complete the list at a later date. >> >> This makes it such that those who add themselves to MAINTAINERS do not >> get push access by default, but rather, they have to request it >> explicitly in a different commit. This used to be the situation >> before it was changed at the start of this year. >> > > I dont object to you adding a list of people with commit acccess though i > dont think its needed or that useful. > But adding a list that is incomplete, sorted in a odd way and doing so in a > commit that states a past rule which i dont think was true, seems not > ideal > > ATM there are I think 117 keys that have write access (some may belong to > the same developers) and also over 100 maintainers in that MAINTAINERs file > I think. I didnt try to count them too precisely. But the numbers are not > that disimilar. The added list is quite abit more different > My intention was to make this complete after it's accepted (or not, if someone doesn't want to be known for having push access). > Also iam not sure this commit will change that much. People who do not want > write access neither before nor afterwards will not send a ssh key so wont get > write access. And people who want write access will push for it and > probably noone will object. Theres the between people who dont push for > it and noone else would push either they might no longer receive write > access. Iam not sure if that is better. > > It makes things more involved but whats really bad is that this extra > step is mainly in your mind, its not docuemnted. > Do i add someone to that new list when i give him write access or do > i give someone write access when a patch adding her is approved. Or do > i just ignore that list because its incomplete anyway ? > > I assume the intend is the 2nd one but How would a contributor know > to add herself to that list and what about people who are quite humble > and who would not push for it yet at the same time would benefit from > write access ? > How would anyone know to maintain something they should add themselves to the list of maintainers? A second list of those with push access doesn't add more roadblocks, it's just a separate list, that's all. You wouldn't have to add yourself to maintainers to get push access if you don't want to. As for those humble, I do see your point, but it's a one-line diff change, and it can be done in the same commit adding yourself to maintainers, it's not a 2-page personal statement about values. > ATM every maintainer automatically receives the right for write access > After this patch its made more difficult, i cant just post a patch adding > random people either Someone would have to convince them first that they > should post a patch to add themselfs. > > So what i really dislike on this change is the potential stumbling blocks > it throws before new developers. > > Its important that one has write access to the repository one works in > In FFmpeg that work happens on git master so write access to that is > important for anyone actively working on it. > In other places work and review might happen in developers own repositories > and they get merged regularly. In that case write access to master is not needed > _______________________________________________ ffmpeg-devel mailing list ffmpeg-devel@ffmpeg.org https://ffmpeg.org/mailman/listinfo/ffmpeg-devel To unsubscribe, visit link above, or email ffmpeg-devel-request@ffmpeg.org with subject "unsubscribe".