On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 16:01 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote: > I'd really like there to be offline support in a manner that allows > non-commiters to be able to clone, modify, and provide a repo back to us that > we can pull from. +1 I think the barrier described earlier is worse than we realize. It may seem like delving into technical details, but actually "centralized v. distributed VCS" is actually a strategic question. Strategically, we need to move _all_ of Fedora in the direction of distributed VCS. Honestly, this is the whole truth behind why we are working our arses off in Docs and L10N to get new ways for people to be able to contribute. We *must* have the XML/PO-based tools to get the work done, but making people go through all the hoops to gain write access to the SCM means we get maybe 1% of the interested people from "I want to help" to actually helping. You see a larger successful percentage with developers because they have been through the VCS account system learning curve in the past. Not so with people who want to write content or translate. This is why everything from GPG keys to CVS committing are so new to so much of our prospective contributors. So, Infrastructure is much closer to developers, in that the pool of potentials are more likely to be clued. But keeping it this hard to contribute means we are missing out on the 10000x more people who are not clued enough to get over the walls, but who would become so clued if we could get them in and working their way along the path to Enlightenment. This goes back to the stuff Blizzard keeps talking about -- getting down the barriers between users and developers that our open collaboration tools ironically create. </rant> - Karsten -- Karsten Wade, 108 Editor ^ Fedora Documentation Project Sr. Developer Relations Mgr. | fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject quaid.108.redhat.com | gpg key: AD0E0C41 ////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
