launchpad-dev team mailing list archive

[James Westby <jw+debian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu Nov 26 19:49:43 -0500 2009 Martin Pool wrote:
> Adding the owner would be a bit consistent with bzr branches, to which
> these have some resemblence.  However, I think putting the owner into
> the branch name has been a bit mixed, because there are important
> cases where people want to change the access rightly without changing
> the name.  Therefore on the whole I'd argue for leaving it out, and
> having an owner field that can be changed later.

The only issue with leaving it out is that the name must then be
unique across all recipes for that package/distro, correct?

I see two problems with this, firstly that if someone calls theirs
say "official" or "poolie" then you have an issue with impersonation.
Yes, you can check the owner by going to the page, but even those
looking at the page might not notice. Granted, there tends to be
a proliferation of branches named "trunk" or similar, so it is hard
to know which is the blessed trunk from the unique name anyway.

The second issue is that I expect people will tend to informally
namespace things by putting their nick in to the recipe name anyway.
This isn't necesarrily an issue, but in other areas LP tends to want
to capture this information structurally where it can.

Thanks,

James