From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E564F1381F3 for ; Sat, 22 Jun 2013 00:17:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A0B54E0A82; Sat, 22 Jun 2013 00:17:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C2D8CE0A43 for ; Sat, 22 Jun 2013 00:17:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from vapier.localnet (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E2BF833E5B9 for ; Sat, 22 Jun 2013 00:17:33 +0000 (UTC) From: Mike Frysinger Organization: wh0rd.org To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Soliciting input for a non-maintainer update (NMU) GLEP Date: Fri, 21 Jun 2013 20:17:38 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/3.8.3; KDE/4.6.5; x86_64; ; ) References: <201306211940.03851.vapier@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart2048312.gS9afQGH8l"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201306212017.38571.vapier@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: c607e5fe-aa27-41e0-9303-ae7080cd2dff X-Archives-Hash: 6b068c59da834cb04866314b32026145 --nextPart2048312.gS9afQGH8l Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Friday 21 June 2013 20:06:31 Robin H. Johnson wrote: > On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 07:40:03PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > On Friday 21 June 2013 14:50:54 Robin H. Johnson wrote: > > > From what I've read on the list recently, there's a lot of demand for > > > non-maintainer updates to ebuilds. Esp. with the upcoming Git > > > migration, I predict there will be a much larger influx of changes > > > from users. > >=20 > > seems like we're somewhat approaching it the wrong way around. >=20 > [Snip giant suggestions re gerrit/review-systems] >=20 > I'm not going into review systems here at all, I'm simply trying to have > a policy of what changes are welcomed/blocked WITHOUT interaction from > the listed maintainer(s) of a given package/herd. add a new field to metadata.xml that declares the state. make it an enum: ANYTHING_GOES (the default) REQUIRES_HERD REQUIRES_MAINTAINER > If they have to ask me to review a trivial patch, I've already failed > them. I don't want ANY gatekeeping, I want them to go and commit it > already. >=20 > Then extending THAT to Gerrit, who is responsible/allowed to hit that > web interface submit button? have gerrit check metadata.xml and see if the policy declared in there line= s=20 up with the gerrit approvals attained. blam, done. =2Dmike --nextPart2048312.gS9afQGH8l Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) iQIcBAABAgAGBQJRxO0iAAoJEEFjO5/oN/WBSggP/jeQGtU/qZ6CkQTXQMrpfeJU +p+kGicpZZEF3eD1pjCcmE/5p2qIMPtK90hQqmxyX8OfAGaLjpqiikN21OYNS++A K0rWlIAtbUEAmieTcZiO1/PVeRbceGIwGJQ5Gw1CAuXcYb4hDgHZDd79ToJ6+mxk 9oxSKXyUe3OIAjbRSQ75kC0tccKihosocIAS8cK0rSEDsOBWWiND3MUxYMX9TVga AbRH/1lmiR3bPy4ZdHQrH+jaW7WGuj8IwqZnP4wyxZHSRBgNPCwDe/jECcQ6VT9X /rSdaygxRwpEN+nIKEB7f3wYE61z7bRf21Pro16sR/MvL7qoy+P/Mr4F3j+vMpu2 UTSFVEnlIK82oxgC/z9QLXq0dEz5bGWWJuWrdgwloqMJUVmKGysnPin3mxaByS0w B4ASE51mK24SuwD27yVECKhJwyO3ynHrupmkQOVGXobSLFRl8YXTpatcIyVVIXxK ZSpqRB6heKiGMggTBiANUo17wDvZMIHmwOnRMih5LJ6zoWMVMtktHDiQJ5K6EGiB QUvqZrpjJ4pDP9RgqKptsjIGxJFrv0SzDS2UljprC0voMvhiiXADE9tjq/Du34Uf q5L1a+IzawC7t5hLuXneOkf34fVoNjmArBAnOqgn7+guvDSbmiOmEMl3uuhmgcgH S1H0RfKBwY/MpDhrweBp =9Sec -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart2048312.gS9afQGH8l--