Require proxy commits [was Re: Two fixes]

[Volker Lendecke]

On Mon, Oct 15, 2007 at 06:15:45PM -0500, Gerald (Jerry) Carter wrote:
> Volker, This at least might make us more sympathetic to other
> developers. :-)
> 
> The main problem I see is that no one is on the hook for
> making sure someone else's patches are committed.  So it's
> easy for things to get dropped.  An interim possibility that
> does require some ownership is to always send patches to
> an owner (or co-owner) of the original code being fixed.
> Or in the case of new code, to the person most active in
> maintaining that feature.  (Hint: a subsystem maintainer
> model).
> 
> We tend to do this anyways so I expect things will continue
> to evolve along this route as we move forward.

The subject is slightly wrong... At least I tried to avoid
the work "require". To avoid the problem that things get
dropped people can certainly still check in themselves if
they get annoyed. But maybe we can just try.

Volker
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.samba.org/archive/samba-technical/attachments/20071016/5a1996b6/attachment.bin