| |||||||||||||
Changes in glibc developmentChanges in glibc developmentPosted Mar 27, 2012 18:03 UTC (Tue) by nix (subscriber, #2304)In reply to: Changes in glibc development by msbrown Parent article: Changes in glibc development
Rather, the number of key contributors with the ability to commit changes (in essence, ability to maintain glibc) has been increased based on those contributors' clearly visible quality and dedication to the work.Of course, this could have happened years and years ago, but for some reason someone who shall remain nameless was dead set against it. (it worked so badly for GCC, after all.)
(Log in to post comments)
Changes in glibc development Posted Mar 27, 2012 19:09 UTC (Tue) by slashdot (guest, #22014) [Link]
The kernel has a single person who can commit changes, and it works very well (although Linus probably tends to pretty much just rubber stamp changes from subsystem maintainers that don't impact code outside the subsystem).
But of course, if no one suitable and willing can be found, multiple committers are better than a bad single maintainer (which Ulrich Drepper was alleged to be).
Perhaps an interesting alternative could be to use a more structured review system (Gerrit?), which makes sure that at a least a few other committers see no issues with a patch even if commit rights are decentralized.
|
|||||||||||||