Re: CVS Account Request

At 00:00 16/11/2000, Rasmus Lerdorf wrote:

Then we need to manage 3 sets of password files instead of just one. And many people will end up in all three. It would make more sense to simply indicate what sort of access each user has and have the verification script check that.

Except it's much easier to divide it to 3 roots, and write a trivial script that adds a single person to more than one root.

However, I am interested to hear what these substantial reasons are. We have yet to have a problem and it feels to me like you are trying to fix something that isn't broken.

First of all, a smart move is to solve the problem before it actually has negative symptoms. Waiting for them to happen makes no sense. The more people you have in CVS, the more likely it is for bugs or security problems to crawl in. Secondly, TONS of bugs have been introduced by buggy CVS commits from people that touched things they weren't completely familiar with, or worse, did things in apparently non core places, that still resulted in either security problems or other sorts of crash bugs. I'm not sure where we would have been without Andi's "CVS police", and frankly, I have no idea where he's drawing the strength to go over almost all of the CVS commits from. Now, one can make a big deal out of it, and take it 'personally', that I don't think the Web guys should have write access to the source code. This shouldn't be the case though. It's just better for things to be organized than not. Since Zak, for instance, has no benefit in having write access to the php4 tree, there's no good reason he should have write access there. I wouldn't deny him, or anybody else access if it's useful for them, but right now, people are getting access to the source repository for no good reason other than a historically messed-up setup. Zeev -- Zeev Suraski <zeev@zend.com> CTO, Zend Technologies Ltd. http://www.zend.com/