[openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- From: "Mikael Jansson (mailing lists)" <lists@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 17:46:06 GMT
>
> IMHO, if the main devs get the same "instant-commit" feature and
> functionality of CVS they are happier (does arch allow this, too?).
> The
> problem is that non-members cannot commit changes easily which often
> prevents them from fixing a bug. Does p4 solve that issue (or could
> we
> use two separate branches or repositories and sync them?)?
>
This says more about branching:
http://www.perforce.com/perforce/doc.042/manuals/p4guide/
09_branching.html
http://www.perforce.com/perforce/doc.042/manuals/cmdref/integrate.html
For non-members, we'd have a similar scheme to what OpenTracker had
back in the day; have a user called "readonly", and then each member
would set their client to "FirstnameLastname_computer". In the
protections table, one could set it up so such that the wouldn't be
able to clobber the main branch, but instead only be able to play
within some protected branch, say //depot/exp/user/...
After that, someone could use p4 integrate to merge their changes with
the main line.
This would require someone handling merges, which seems like a
complicated way of doing stuff, and the problem occur in all revision
control systems, btw. I think it's better to only give members write
access to the repository. It's only a matter of the super-user doing
something along the lines of 'p4 user username', setting the password
and real name, and he could start using it.
--
Mikael Jansson
http://mikael.jansson.be
- References:
- [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- From: Waldemar Kornewald
Other related posts:
- » [openbeos] Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- » [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- [openbeos] Re: Organizational question
- From: Waldemar Kornewald