On Wednesday 08 March 2006 17:26, Neil Conway wrote:
> On Wed, 2006-03-08 at 17:07 -0500, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > so it is only the physical commit action that separates committers from
> > non-committers, so for us, commit privileges aren't a good indicator.
>
> Sure they are: having the commit bit partly reflects the degree of trust
> that the developer has earned based on their prior contributions. The
> significance of having commit privileges depends on the project: in
> Postgres it typically takes a *long* time for an individual to become a
> committer, whereas other projects are more liberal about it.
I think Bruce's take is more accurate. For example, look at folks like Dave,
Magnus, Teodor, or myself; none of us have commit (afaik) but I would like to
think we would all be trusted not to screw things up if we had it.
OTOH I guess there might be more people like you who look at it like a trust
thing, and I just haven't been told about this since I'm not trusted. :-)
Given the amount of access I have to other things, I doubt that's the case
though. Or at least I'll keep telling myself that.
--
Robert Treat
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
