Confirmed users
290
edits
Talk:Misc:Review Stats: Difference between revisions
Clarity about qualifications for CVS checkin Access
No edit summary |
(Clarity about qualifications for CVS checkin Access) |
||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
-- Jens Bannmann | -- Jens Bannmann | ||
== Clarity on when one could request CVS checkin Access == | |||
While this is only semi-relevant, I would like to express some concern about how many reviewers there are in the first place, because I think this too influences the delays in giving out reviews. While of course, every module would like more reviewers, I have (from time to time) heard complaints especially about front-end code. One of the points I'd like to make about this is that the [http://www.mozilla.org/hacking/getting-cvs-write-access.html documentation on how to get cvs access on mozilla.org] is targeted to a C/C++ oriented audience, and rather vague at actual requirements. (X-ray vision and such). | |||
The requirements being detailed in such a way means that apparently, people who solely hack on front-end code cannot apply for CVS access, while I doubt mconnor and some of the other reviewers would say 'no' if asked if they would appreciate any help in reviews and/or checkins. | |||
Even taking this into account: At this point, I have had nearly 50 patches checked into the tree, primarily for ChatZilla. The document doesn't give me the slightest clue whether this is 'enough' to apply for CVS access, and I'm not happy about randomly asking for cvs-access because of the general rules on IRC / Forums / Communities in general (asking to become ircop/admin/mod/anything-of-importance rules you out). While I guess this is not entirely the case here, it still means I (and I assume others) are reluctant in asking for cvs access, while I think that reviewers could certainly appreciate a hand at times. | |||
I'm assuming I'm not the only one with this problem (or who would imagine such a problem occurring for potential new continuous contributors), in order for the above not to turn into a shameless self-promotion. If this assumption turns out to be erroneous (and I'm either of 'too humble' or 'too eager'), my apologies; it is definitely not intended to be a shameless self-promotion :-). | |||
[[User:GijsKruitbosch|GijsKruitbosch]] 16:28, 22 Nov 2005 (PST) | |||