On Sun, 2003-09-28 at 23:28, kfogel@collab.net wrote:
> > I think I'm only asking for a proofreader.
>
> Shamim, the current arrangement obviously isn't making anyone happy,
> least of all you. For whatever reason, your sense of the project
> conventions has not matched that of all (or most) of the other
> committers. Pre-commit proofreading sounds like the best solution, as
> you imply above.
Makes sense.
> I was the person who originally offered you commit access for Mandrake
> packaging [original mail included below], and given what HACKING says
> about partial commit access...
>
> they're doing and will watch the partial committer's first few commits
> to make sure everything's going smoothly."
>
> ... I think it's a fair interpretation that if things *aren't* going
> smoothly, then the person who sponsored the commit access can, if all
> else fails, revoke the commit access. I've done so.
Doesn't bother me any. Seriously. I was hoping someone would show me the
ropes. I was very puzzled and taken aback when I was offered
guardianship of the Mandrake RPMS. Granted, it was something very close
to me, so I felt it was an honor, regardless of how lost I felt.
I think you might have seen it in my earlier questioning about private
branches and what not and committing to the trunk.
Maybe I should sit down and compile a compendium of what I *have*
learned for anyone that wants to get on board in the future so that
their learning curve isn't as steep?
When the previous owner indicated he had an interest in transferring
ownership, I didn't object because I felt it was important to maintain
it and that I would try my darndest. Just didn't quite realize the
magnitude of everything else associated with.
> You are not to blame in this situation, rather I am. Our project
> guidelines are not always simple to follow, and it's up to the sponsor
> to verify that the potential committer has a firm grasp of the
So I can send my patches to the list and you can verify that they're
ready for prime time?
I don't have to worry about justifying why Mandrake does something a
particular way as long as I'm not affecting anyone or anything else
except for the Mandrake RPMS, correct?
> If I had waited to see some patches first, you would have been able to
> fix the problems at your leisure, and the general irritation level for
Agreed.
> Please accept my apologies for putting you in this situation. Let's
> go back to where this all should have started: you posting patches,
Sure thing. As long as I can get my Mandrake RPMs built w/ the latest
source, I'm happy. And as long as everyone else can get them too, the
better.
You have *no* idea how difficult it is to try to coexist with RedHat
builds and having to relocate packages left and right.
--
Shamim Islam
BA BS
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Sep 29 07:26:17 2003