Subject: Re: [boost] Git permissions model
From: Bjørn Roald (bjorn_at_[hidden])
Date: 2013-12-04 00:48:56
On 12/04/2013 05:51 AM, Agustín K-ballo Bergé wrote:
> On 04/12/2013 01:44 a.m., Vladimir Prus wrote:
>> I have a couple of questions about the permission models that we use for
>> - To give somebody push access to the 'build' repository, I need to
>> file an
>> admin issue. Why can't I control access to the repository I maintain?
>> In fact, why I can't even edit repository description?
> +1 I believe library authors/maintainers should have admin access to
> their own repositories, and thus have direct control over the
> permissions granted to collaborators.
>> - Suppose I find a random typo in library X. In SVN, I can just fix it
>> within a minute.
>> In Git, I would have to either ask for push access (which I think
>> won't scale), or
>> I need to fork the repo, to the change, and submit a pull request,
>> which is equally
>> cumbersome. Was not Git supposed to simplify things?
> True, that's the recommended procedure. Note however that you can edit
> the file "in-place" from github, and it will take care of the fork and
> pull request for you. All you need to do is edit the file on a web form.
That is nice, however I can't escape the feeling that the fork - pull
request solution feels very heavy handed for many use-cases. That
GitHub have a neat web interface solution that does the lifting does not
change the weight of it.
Can we clean up and get rid of the forks that we are done with?