From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Patch queue management systems Date: Tue, 09 Dec 2014 21:31:46 +0200 Message-ID: <54874E22.4010504@yandex.ru> References: <546D2E75.6090701@cs.ucla.edu> <837fyp7tvi.fsf@gnu.org> <546E2899.4050702@cs.ucla.edu> <54756754.5090103@cs.ucla.edu> <54762721.4060908@cs.ucla.edu> <17zjb2h650.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <86mw71pl6d.fsf@yandex.ru> <83fvct145r.fsf@gnu.org> <5486F304.9030101@yandex.ru> <83iohkwy0p.fsf@gnu.org> <54872EA6.9090405@yandex.ru> <83egs8wwr6.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1418153546 30298 80.91.229.3 (9 Dec 2014 19:32:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 9 Dec 2014 19:32:26 +0000 (UTC) Cc: eggert@cs.ucla.edu, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Dec 09 20:32:15 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XyQW6-0006gJ-PQ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2014 20:32:14 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42149 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XyQW6-0006FX-Af for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2014 14:32:14 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42212) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XyQVu-0006FI-CR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2014 14:32:11 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XyQVl-0006ym-AZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Dec 2014 14:32:02 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-wi0-x22c.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c05::22c]:57640) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XyQVl-0006yV-2z; Tue, 09 Dec 2014 14:31:53 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-wi0-f172.google.com with SMTP id n3so8993774wiv.17 for ; Tue, 09 Dec 2014 11:31:52 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject :references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=WFI6eLmAs/d//r3pBJWVj35cARhHroEWGGgFeJ42qf8=; b=z++Yu9LhQHcxd/q7ivrQw3hVndJLpjbhgRikfQqTI69iqGBW3/WM2oeva+oKpz688b i9mKBTc1k3Wjr1H7fImA23j7SNHan5e4i8PYlql4q9AZL8W2NtqQqRQWo+E9wVNApkLF cmwgiHCNC3YPAkCnhwH9R1KnGYOwT90RAyX2wejHdoOCJbXQzXtH3mNRqPhuh98UKtTx sWs/kPYJIzGS5/6hNf6adXD54MkKyE3feeg5ShQzbnz5gqsSTwItkSVFLddRULj4Eiys YHAEOPhRLdyq068eW4tK8wEaqNfZDpSeMZBJI1zAoYzxor5gC0dujHonMARWUhAc2Jic r8jg== X-Received: by 10.194.93.5 with SMTP id cq5mr106635wjb.84.1418153512295; Tue, 09 Dec 2014 11:31:52 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.2] ([82.102.93.58]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id dg7sm3455073wib.24.2014.12.09.11.31.49 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 09 Dec 2014 11:31:51 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.2.0 In-Reply-To: <83egs8wwr6.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:400c:c05::22c X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:179587 Archived-At: On 12/09/2014 07:36 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > I thought we wanted to make the review process mandatory for > everybody. A code review system can facilitate that workflow, but it doesn't require it. > If we don't, we will have to come up with strict criteria for granting > commit access, because commit access is global and nowadays given to > people who only work on a small number of specific areas. Yes, probably. Either way, I'm ambivalent on the question of removing ChangeLogs, but doing that would allow to simplify automatic merging of patches.