From: Daniel Schoepe <daniel@schoepe.org>
To: Jani Nikula <jani@nikula.org>, notmuch@notmuchmail.org
Subject: Re: Patch review/application process
Date: Wed, 26 Oct 2011 20:55:33 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <8762jbfuqi.fsf@gilead.invalid> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <87mxcnbo8e.fsf@nikula.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1889 bytes --]
On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 18:29:37 +0000, Jani Nikula <jani@nikula.org> wrote:
> The good thing is, there are contributions and review. The bad thing is,
> unless you've hung around long enough, you don't know if the reviewers
> are people whose comments you should really pay attention to or not, and
> either way, fixing the patches seems pointless and frustrating if they
> don't get applied anyway.
>
> A MAINTAINERS file might be helpful in identifying some of the key
> people. AUTHORS could be updated to include people with not
> insignificant contributions.
I agree, that sounds like a good idea.
> If the problem is lack of time, I'm not sure if setting up and
> maintaining some world facing web service would help things.
This idea was mainly intended to prevent patches from being forgotten,
an issue not entirely orthogonal to the main point.
> > - Some kind of "voting system" that gets a patch applied if some
> > number of "trusted" contributors reviewed a patch and think it is
> > good. I haven't given this idea much thought and I guess it might
> > lead to a "lack of direction / guiding principles" in the development
> > of notmuch.
>
> I wouldn't put too much emphasis on creating a voting system or a
> process. I do have hopes for the tag sharing mechanism helping in
> tracking the reviewed patches, though. That means figuring out whose
> tags to trust anyway.
Yes, I didn't envision some process that's formalized down to every
detail, but more of a general guideline like "if at least n people out
of {set of trusted contributors} agree and there's no controversy about
the patch, anyone with commit access is allowed to apply the patch". I
think this idea would help mainly with getting small patches like [1]
applied more quickly.
[1] id:"1309890780-8214-1-git-send-email-pieter@praet.org"
Cheers,
Daniel
[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 835 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-10-26 18:55 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-10-25 20:42 Patch review/application process Daniel Schoepe
2011-10-25 23:16 ` David Bremner
2011-10-26 18:29 ` Jani Nikula
2011-10-26 18:55 ` Daniel Schoepe [this message]
2011-11-01 14:28 ` David Bremner
2011-11-01 15:55 ` Jameson Graef Rollins
2011-11-01 19:55 ` David Bremner
2011-11-01 21:27 ` Jameson Graef Rollins
2011-11-01 23:22 ` David Bremner
2011-11-01 23:43 ` Jameson Graef Rollins
2011-11-02 15:49 ` Philip Hands
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://notmuchmail.org/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=8762jbfuqi.fsf@gilead.invalid \
--to=daniel@schoepe.org \
--cc=jani@nikula.org \
--cc=notmuch@notmuchmail.org \
/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://yhetil.org/notmuch.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).