Re: Moving pkgsrc-wip away from SourceForge

[Sebastian Wiedenroth <wiedi%frubar.net@localhost>]

> Am 14.07.2015 um 13:27 schrieb Greg Troxel <gdt%ir.bbn.com@localhost>:
> 
> Sure, that's easy enough.  I don't understand the desire for the "pull
> request" model.  Certainly that can make sense when actual push access
> is restricted to a limited set.  But with wip, commit (would be push)
> access has been handed out just for the asking.  Or rather, even without
> asking - I have often written to people who send patches and asked for
> their account name to add them to the ACL.  I don't think we've said no
> to anyone.

Sorry if this drifting off-topic, but let me explain why I like the „pull request“ model.

Independent of access restrictions pull-requests give me a chance to get code reviewed before integrating.
This second set of eyes improves quality, helps me learn as I can get feedback and builds confidence that I won’t break things.
Of course one can have code review without pull requests, but since the first reviewer to agree with the change can do the push it takes away one roundtrip.

I also agree with you that for pkgsrc-wip it is not necessary to enforce this model.
The permission to commit/push can be given like it has been in the past.
Many small changes can be pushed directly and don’t need thorough review.

The pull-request model can be offered in addition for the cases where the author would prefer the change to be reviewed.
It can also be a way for new contributors to send changes that don’t have the commit bit yet.

I hope that makes sense and adds context instead of just noise :)