Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-geronimo-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 17610 invoked by uid 500); 14 Aug 2003 06:47:04 -0000 Mailing-List: contact geronimo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk list-help: list-unsubscribe: list-post: Reply-To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 17483 invoked from network); 14 Aug 2003 06:47:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO reason.planet57.com) (202.183.249.229) by daedalus.apache.org with SMTP; 14 Aug 2003 06:47:03 -0000 Received: from coredevelopers.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by reason.planet57.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A94735565C for ; Thu, 14 Aug 2003 13:47:33 +0700 (ICT) Date: Thu, 14 Aug 2003 13:47:32 +0700 Subject: Re: commit privs (was: geronimo-dev Digest 13 Aug 2003 16:44:13 -0000 Issue 47) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v552) From: Jason Dillon To: geronimo-dev@incubator.apache.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit In-Reply-To: <20030813204726.GC31589@lyra.org> Message-Id: <2E4224EA-CE23-11D7-ACF2-000A9566A360@coredevelopers.net> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.552) X-Spam-Rating: daedalus.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N > To make that concrete for Geronimo: there have been patches from > people who > are creating test cases. I'd say to give them commit access for adding > test > cases. The standard rules would still apply for access to the "full" > Geronimo codebase, but in the meantime, you don't have to worry about > continually applying test case patches. > [ of course, the new committer would need to submit a CLA, as usual ] Sounds very reasonable +1 BTW, I would still be interested in making use of SVN... what is your feel about its readiness for a project of this size? --jason