[Nix-dev] Again: Why don't these people have commit access

[Moritz Ulrich]

Pascal Wittmann <PascalWittmann at gmx.net> writes:

> On 01/18/2015 06:19 PM, Nathan Bijnens wrote:
>> While I don't mind that we expand the number of people with commit access,
>> I firmly oppose doing changes directly on master, any change should first
>> be a PR. If there're more people who can close a PR, those PRs will be open
>> for a shorter amount of time.
>
> What is the advantage? IMO this would create an enormous overhead. E.g.
> I just updated abiword from 3.0.0 to 3.0.1 and only changed the version
> number and hash. Is this worth a pull request? I don't want to merge
> those pull requests, they only cover the discussion-worthy pull requests.

I totally agree here: Simple version-updates, fixes, (simple) new
packages, etc. should go into master/staging without a PR.

We can still create pull requests for bigger changes and/or
controversial ideas.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 818 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.science.uu.nl/pipermail/nix-dev/attachments/20150118/ba052f94/attachment.bin