[Pkg-puppet-devel] Fwd: Do we need different debian/ubuntu maintainer groups?

[Mathias Gug]

Hi,

On Fri, Jun 04, 2010 at 08:34:52AM -0700, Nigel Kersten wrote:
> On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 7:25 AM, micah anderson <micah at riseup.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> One proposal is to give commit access to the Debian git repository to an Ubuntu
> >> developer so that most of the packaging work can be directly committed to
> >> Debian without having to go through the Debian BTS. If this seems unreasonable
> >> we can stick with the current process of filling bugs in BTS and waiting for
> >> someone on the Debian side to perform the patch review.
> >
> > I would be fine with giving Ubuntu developers git commit access to the
> > repository. We are trying to do code review for every commit, so the
> > review is there be it via a patch or a git commit. The only difference
> > is the patch introduces a lot of overhead on all sides.
> 
> I'm fine with that access too.

I now have access to alioth and I was able to clone puppet.git using the following command:

 git clone git+ssh://git.debian.org/git/pkg-puppet/puppet.git debian.git

I'd like to know what the current practice with pushing patches to the git
repository. It seems that a +1 practice is being pushed forward. Which workflow is put forward:

  A. 1. commit to the git repository
     2. +1 on the mailing list (what happens when no +1 are received? Default to accepting or rejecting?)

  B. 1. send patch to mailing list (via git-send-email)?
     2. +1 on the mailing list (how many?)
     3. commit to the git repository (who?)

Option A or B?

Thanks,

-- 
Mathias Gug
Ubuntu Developer  http://www.ubuntu.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
URL: <http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/pkg-puppet-devel/attachments/20100607/2af4dc0a/attachment.pgp>