Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: GCC and Monotone

[Tom Tromey]

>>>>> "Zack" == Zack Weinberg <address@hidden> writes:

Zack> ... I was using 'depot' as a generic term; I guess I meant 'database'?
Zack> The gcc.gnu.org server would probably handle NNTP, HTTP, and email;
Zack> and it's the last of these that I'm concerned about - access control
Zack> is easy to arrange for the first two, but we *want* arbitrary people
Zack> to be able to feed us patches via email.  They wouldn't get merged
Zack> until someone looks at them, but I think anonymous patch submission
Zack> into database has great promise for preventing patches from getting
Zack> dropped on the floor.

I think GCC probably shouldn't use the monotone depot at all, and
should just be SMTP/NNTP.

I picture gcc.gnu.org listening to the mailing list and automatically
creating a master database of some kind.  We could probably set up
some kind of expiry feature so that patches older than a couple months
are just dropped.  We could be even more aggressive about this sort of
thing if it turns out to be a problem.  Automated patch pings are also
a possibility.

Tom