Re: PostgreSQL committer history?
От | Robert Treat |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PostgreSQL committer history? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200603081752.29486.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PostgreSQL committer history? (Neil Conway <neilc@samurai.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: PostgreSQL committer history?
|
Список | pgsql-advocacy |
On Wednesday 08 March 2006 17:26, Neil Conway wrote: > On Wed, 2006-03-08 at 17:07 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > so it is only the physical commit action that separates committers from > > non-committers, so for us, commit privileges aren't a good indicator. > > Sure they are: having the commit bit partly reflects the degree of trust > that the developer has earned based on their prior contributions. The > significance of having commit privileges depends on the project: in > Postgres it typically takes a *long* time for an individual to become a > committer, whereas other projects are more liberal about it. I think Bruce's take is more accurate. For example, look at folks like Dave, Magnus, Teodor, or myself; none of us have commit (afaik) but I would like to think we would all be trusted not to screw things up if we had it. OTOH I guess there might be more people like you who look at it like a trust thing, and I just haven't been told about this since I'm not trusted. :-) Given the amount of access I have to other things, I doubt that's the case though. Or at least I'll keep telling myself that. -- Robert Treat Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: