cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Upayavira>
Subject Re: [PATCH][Gump] your definitions break Gump builds
Date Fri, 17 Jun 2005 09:33:07 GMT
Stefano Mazzocchi wrote:
> Stefan Bodewig wrote:
>>On Thu, 16 Jun 2005, Stefano Mazzocchi <> wrote:
>>>it's not a matter of being annoyed enough (we are already!), it's
>>>the fact that cocoon needs that file at build time.
>>Hmm, so why don't you realize that you have a typo in it for many
>>days?  Like when you rename a jar but forget to update the descriptor?
> because cocoon doesn't use *all* of that data, only parts.
> Truth be told, cocoon could have two files, one for gump and one for its
> own build system, but they would contain the same information.
>>>Now, I would be totally in favor of granting the gump committers
>>>commit access to the cocoon project.
>>Should be quite trivial to add a rule to asf-authorization that grants
>>rw to @gump for just that file, at least I think it allows
> Even better. Can we do it or is it something that infra@ has to do?

I've just tried it on a local installation of SVN, and it seems to work
just fine. I believe we can just do it ourselves, although it would be
polite to mention it on infra as it isn't something I've seen done
before, so does establish something of a new policy.

Here's the patch that would be required. It's pretty simple:

Index: asf-authorization
--- asf-authorization   (revision 191108)
+++ asf-authorization   (working copy)
@@ -339,6 +339,9 @@
  @cocoon = rw
  @lenya = rw

+@gump = rw
  @forrest = rw
  @cocoon = rw

So, we all want this?

Regards, Upayavira

View raw message