Re: we now have "lilypond" organization on GitHub

[Urs Liska]

Am 16.09.2013 12:50, schrieb David Kastrup:
> Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > On Mon, Sep 16, 2013 at 10:49:42AM +0200, David Kastrup wrote:
> > > > What's wrong with GitHub, anyway?
> > > It requires separate accounts and credentials (much more likely to be a
> > > target for attacks), has its own "terms of service", may choose to
> > > discontinue projects based on commercial criteria, can cause tool
> > > lock-in and so on, relies on its own proprietary software.
> > All the above is true, but github also provides a nicer way for
> > developers to interact with git, by at least one order of
> > magnitude.
> So the question is what we should be telling the Savannah operators to
> make working on GNU projects using Git more feasible.
What about asking them to provide Gerrit as  a service?

As far as I've read:
- LilyPond uses Rietveld, which isn't designed for git workflows.
- Rietveld isn't integrated in the process of getting code into 
lilypond/master,
  but rather an artificial detour.
- For example the issue of commit messages that are finally pushed
  and don't match the reviewed code is probably related to that.
- Gerrit _is_ designed for git workflows.
- You could grant developer accounts to, say, anybody expressing serious 
intentions to contribute
- These could have the right to push the Gerrit
- The core developers have the right to approve/reject proposals
  as well as pushing directly to the main repo
- Approval of a patch immediately merges it into the main code base.
- This would make the way for externals' code into the main code base
  more straightforward and transparent.

Urs