On 2008-March-17 , at 13:26 , Aaron Spike wrote:
jiho wrote:
Plus, distributed version control would ease a model where changes are reviewed by several people before they are committed to the main tree (i.e. just pull the changes from other people's trees and allow commits to the main tree only by the reviewers).
I am opposed to such a working model. Reviewing would be a fulltime job, and not that much of fun (count me out!). Who will have enough knowledge of allll of inkscape anyway?
I think I agree here. In the Inkscape project we don't follow such a model. We are very open with committer access and that is one of the reasons for the project's success.
Just to clarify about this. I know that this is not Inkscape's current workflow and probably should not become it in the future either (if I understood things well, Sodipodi used such a kind of hierarchical workflow and this was not really appreciated by the folks now working on Inkscape ;) ). I mentioned this here in the context of refactoring, where Bryce suggested: [...] I'd like to suggest the following principles: ... * Hold code review parties with 2-3 others to brainstorm ... I just wanted to mention that a DVCS could ease that part very much by allowing a few people to pull from others and then one of the reviewers to push that to the central repo once the change set is done. Maybe my words were a bit strong in saying that committing to the central repo would be restricted to only a few people. The workflow was really what I wanted to point out.
JiHO --- http://jo.irisson.free.fr/