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

Lluís Batlle i Rossell viric at viric.name
Sun Jan 18 22:36:25 CET 2015

On Sun, Jan 18, 2015 at 07:53:35PM +0100, Moritz Ulrich wrote:
> 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.

Remember that we use a comfortable VCS, and it is quite easy to take
back things if the changes seem not to work well. And they can be reapplied
again later if they were doing the right thing, etc.

As for me, let the listed contributors commit to master!

More information about the nix-dev mailing list