From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jakub Narebski Subject: Re: Can I enforce required approval on some files Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2010 09:51:22 +0200 Message-ID: <201007210951.25150.jnareb@gmail.com> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE Cc: Dominik Gront , git@vger.kernel.org To: =?utf-8?q?=C3=86var_Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0_Bjarmason?= X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Jul 21 09:51:44 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.180.67]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ObU5g-0004WC-2H for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 09:51:44 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1762783Ab0GUHvi convert rfc822-to-quoted-printable (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Jul 2010 03:51:38 -0400 Received: from mail-fx0-f46.google.com ([209.85.161.46]:34577 "EHLO mail-fx0-f46.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1755065Ab0GUHvh (ORCPT ); Wed, 21 Jul 2010 03:51:37 -0400 Received: by fxm14 with SMTP id 14so3311291fxm.19 for ; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 00:51:36 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:from:to:subject:date :user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition:message-id; bh=d266pGMLED9Lw+QoI8sLH/wJh/BRbTtVMwBJFqBnXTk=; b=biN5nKxreC4MMau/qy1XsxaeCUuWLQkVcJ52lIw/G4Rwnv5bjXn0441HOvvv5ULIqr nhAFpQiDsDXVVcE3FJDRG1z1exTz0BpNokcK4/YrPc5waG6WNoK0KD6sMavR28YnBc6A lUaCFmnjqtHoiFiH/dHqbLtnlRSX9aAFLcC9U= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:user-agent:cc:references:in-reply-to :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding :content-disposition:message-id; b=rM4twD0Of3rmmEpAcu/CREWq7iF/l8ZHCgqnz1FMWn+9vE8xk3GC8tPyH91eVb3GWu MZAOhpckEfGzfPBNud7Jc4Dort6gL5051jkTQoyGcvxFcDi6+2t6xKP7tflwe0O1xBGM vJuWljMc8vrp2vl4sWY0d6FdgJsMGOrywH6io= Received: by 10.86.70.16 with SMTP id s16mr4866818fga.26.1279698696574; Wed, 21 Jul 2010 00:51:36 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.13] (aeho173.neoplus.adsl.tpnet.pl [79.186.196.173]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id r8sm2784711faq.34.2010.07.21.00.51.33 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 21 Jul 2010 00:51:35 -0700 (PDT) User-Agent: KMail/1.9.3 In-Reply-To: Content-Disposition: inline Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: On Wed, 21 Jul 2010, =C3=86var Arnfj=C3=B6r=C3=B0 Bjarmason wrote: > On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 22:03, Jakub Narebski wrot= e: >=20 > > Besides solution mentioned by others, namely integration repository > > with moderator, you can also use patch/commit code review tool such= as > > Gerrit (http://code.google.com/p/gerrit/), equivalent of Rietveld f= or > > Subversion, or Mondrian for Perforce. >=20 > There's also the low-tech solution of just telling people to submit > again until their patches don't suck, it works for git.git, and is > attainable when you're not doing a centralized tool. That's what I meant by "besides [...] integration repository with moderator", moderator who reviews patches or pull requests, and accepts into integration repository or rejects them. --=20 Jakub Narebski Poland