From: Andreas Enge <andreas@enge.fr>
To: "Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@gnu.org>
Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org, Christopher Baines <mail@cbaines.net>,
61894@debbugs.gnu.org, guix-maintainers@gnu.org
Subject: [bug#61894] [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches
Date: Thu, 2 Mar 2023 12:04:44 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ZACCzGx70IiN3eIc@jurong> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87r0u86qgo.fsf_-_@gnu.org>
Hello,
in the current situation I think the suggestion is putting the horse before
the cart. In a first step before adding policy, we should make the teams
functional. While working on core-updates, I have been realising we are
already spread too thin: Some important languages have teams with one or
two members, who would effectively become bottlenecks. Other software has
no team (Qt/KDE). All in all, I also think we have too few committers.
Adding policy might completely stall the project...
If for every trivial update of a Python package we need not only submit a
patch to the bugtracker, wait for QA, get back to the patch, resign it,
push it and close the bug, but additionally wait for one of the two Python
team members to have a look at it (or let an additional week pass),
incentives to participate will tend to zero.
Your suggested policy can help against commits of too bad quality; but I
do not think this is our problem, our problem is rather a lack of fast
progress.
So I think we need to add committers, add committers to teams, encourage
teams to engage in work, and if everything works smoothly, maybe add policy.
Andreas
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2023-03-02 11:05 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 9+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2023-03-01 16:13 [bug#61894] [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches Ludovic Courtès
[not found] ` <871qm8wf8e.fsf@cbaines.net>
2023-03-01 19:21 ` Felix Lechner via Guix-patches via
2023-03-01 22:45 ` Ludovic Courtès
2023-03-02 11:04 ` Andreas Enge [this message]
2023-03-07 1:53 ` 宋文武 via Guix-patches via
[not found] ` <ZAcTw6I31Rl3nRDE@jurong>
[not found] ` <861qm0da4y.fsf@gmail.com>
2023-03-07 18:29 ` Maxim Cournoyer
2023-03-07 22:40 ` Leo Famulari
[not found] ` <874jqvul1v.fsf@gmail.com>
2023-03-09 8:48 ` Simon Tournier
[not found] ` <ZAhRg7BjytZGGB5O@3900XT>
[not found] ` <878rg7uqb4.fsf@gmail.com>
[not found] ` <86lek6ntpb.fsf@gmail.com>
[not found] ` <874jqtte7c.fsf@gmail.com>
[not found] ` <87bkl0frnk.fsf@gnu.org>
[not found] ` <87356ar6p1.fsf@gmail.com>
[not found] ` <87bkku2e14.fsf@gnu.org>
2023-03-17 15:46 ` Maxim Cournoyer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://guix.gnu.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ZACCzGx70IiN3eIc@jurong \
--to=andreas@enge.fr \
--cc=61894@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=guix-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=guix-maintainers@gnu.org \
--cc=ludo@gnu.org \
--cc=mail@cbaines.net \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/guix.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).