пятница, 15 сентября 2000 г., you wrote to me:
EB> I've found a potential web page maintainer for http://www.mingw.org. Should we
EB> require that changes to the web pages be formally submitted as patches or just
EB> allow this person to `cvs commit' whenever and with whatever s/he desires?
EB> Comments please.
Of course, we should not give write access to the first comer. But
neither threshold to get one should be high, IMHO - we on the safe
side by using CVS (but backing up requires effort too - this should be
taken into account), so it's better to allow persons interested to
have it and thus allowing one to contribute, than to keep away. So, couple
of non-trivial patches (i.e. ones that add content, not merely fix
broken links) should be enough, IMHO.
But of course, we should'n enforce rigid roles in maintainership
- of course, someone will go mostly for site, and someone for techy
stuff, but if I see broken link or have inspiration to write the
history (btw, corrections and additions welcome, there're at least
some dates should be filled), why I should not that.
And remember, that the roles stipulation isn't technically
possible either - to get CVS write access, one should be given
developer status, but that allows for write access to whole CVS and
entire group space on the SF shell box.
EB> --- <http://earniesystems.safeshopper.com> ---
EB> Earnie Boyd: <mailto:earnie_boyd@...>
Paul Sokolovsky, IT Specialist