Problems getting developer access to the xorg cvs

[Deron Johnson]

The release wranglers encouraged me to set up the LG3D master source as
a branch of the Xorg source. How am I supposed to do that if the
people working on LG can't get access?


Stuart Kreitman wrote:
> Keith:
> 
> I am on the board, and I vouch for Amir's candidacy.
> 
> skk
> 
> Keith Whitwell wrote:
> 
> 
>>Deron Johnson wrote:
>>
>>
>>>A member of the Looking Glass team (Amir Bukhari) has been trying
>>>to get developer access to the xorg cvs for about a month now.
>>>It has been an unnecessarily painful process for him. Figuring out
>>>exactly how to go about doing this has been difficult because the
>>>xorg documentation concerning this was out of date in that it named
>>>Kaleb Keithly who no longer acts in the role of providing access.
>>>My understanding is that the documentation is being updated to
>>>instruct people to send mail to the sitewranglers alias. Unfortunately,
>>>sitewranglers is a moderated mailing list so anyone trying to mail
>>>to it gets a bounce which basically says that the moderator is waiting
>>>to review your mail. This doesn't seem like a very good interface for
>>>accepting new developers. It would be better if there were an alias
>>>which responded to the effect that "your request for developer access
>>>has been received and a reply will be sent shortly." People shouldn't
>>>be required to send to an alias that they ordinarily aren't allowed to
>>>send to in order to achieve something so basic.
>>>
>>>Overall I think xorg needs to improve the process of accepting new
>>>developers. If its hard for new people to join then it becomes somewhat
>>>of an elitist club. I never would have thought that it would take more
>>>than a month to get someone developer access.
>>
>>
>>I'm not necessarily in favour of people being granted CVS access sight 
>>unseen.   I don't know what your developer's situation is, but I don't 
>>think there should be an expectation that people who haven't 
>>participated in development previously, I'm talking about submitting 
>>patches, bug reports, etc., should expect CVS access just by asking 
>>for it.  Nor, obviously, do I think that the XFree86 idea of (I don't 
>>know how much) more than 5 years of waiting for this is desireable 
>>either.
>>
>>But I do feel that CVS access should be a priviledge granted sometime 
>>after a person has individually shown themselves to be a worthwhile & 
>>useful developer.  It's obviously a lot less contentious to weed 
>>people out *before* granting CVS access to being in a position later 
>>on where you have to yank it, which is always going to lead to hard 
>>feelings.
>>
>>So, in respect to your developer, I don't see any posts to this list 
>>from him (though I don't have a full archive, so I could be wrong) - 
>>shouldn't some basic participation in the public lists be a 
>>prerequisite to CVS access?
>>
>>Also let me note that I'm not in a position to influence the descision 
>>one way or another, just expressing my opinions on the matter.
>>
>>Keith
>>_______________________________________________
>>xorg mailing list
>>xorg at freedesktop.org
>>http://freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg
> 
> 
>