From: Jonathan Larmour <jifl@eCosCentric.com>
To: Andrew Lunn <andrew.lunn@ascom.ch>
Cc: Gary Thomas <gary@mlbassoc.com>,
eCos Maintainers <ecos-maintainers@sources.redhat.com>
Subject: Re: Patch policy
Date: Tue, 06 May 2003 14:51:00 -0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <3EB7CC0C.2030800@eCosCentric.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20030506134022.GM24032@biferten.ma.tech.ascom.ch>
Andrew Lunn wrote:
>>This is policy that we would have to develop (decide on).
>>One way would be to only accept patches via BugZilla. Then the
>>onus would be on the submitter. To make this policy work, maybe
>>we'd want to have the default owner of the "bug" be the patches
>>list, or at least send a copy there.
>
>
> I think part of the problem is that there is no clear owner of a
> patch. So i would not set the default owner to "bug", but rather the
> owner of the component, so we have a real name we can point a finger
> at. The assignment can be changed manually if its not appropriate.
One important thing we're missing though is a sort-of "checklist" for
patches. We (I) have been lax in the past sometimes, and then the problem
multiplies when someone uses a laxly written port as a basis for _their_
port. Part of that would be coding standards - not so much indent level
and such like as just making sure comments in files refer to the current
filename not an old one, author is correct, doesn't mention the
architecture/platform it was derived from etc. But we have to solve our
own inconsistencies there too!
A (script-driven) overhaul of our standard preamble would help a lot too -
authors vs. contributors is somewhat ambiguous. I would prefer
"maintainer" and contributors, where the former is the person responsible
for the file (not necessarily one of us, i.e. not necessarily a maintainer
maintainer :-)) and the latter is _anyone_ who's touched the file (if they
want). But this is just one of the low priority things to do that there's
never enough impetus to do.
Jifl
--
eCosCentric http://www.eCosCentric.com/ The eCos and RedBoot experts
--[ "You can complain because roses have thorns, or you ]--
--[ can rejoice because thorns have roses." -Lincoln ]-- Opinions==mine
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2003-05-06 14:51 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2003-05-06 12:59 Gary Thomas
2003-05-06 13:17 ` Mark Salter
2003-05-06 13:26 ` Andrew Lunn
2003-05-06 13:34 ` Gary Thomas
2003-05-06 13:40 ` Andrew Lunn
2003-05-06 13:44 ` Gary Thomas
2003-05-06 14:51 ` Jonathan Larmour [this message]
2003-05-06 14:46 ` Jonathan Larmour
2003-05-07 20:30 ` Jonathan Larmour
2003-05-07 21:54 ` Gary Thomas
2003-05-07 22:48 ` Alex Schuilenburg
2003-05-07 23:02 ` Jonathan Larmour
2003-05-07 23:39 ` Alex Schuilenburg
2003-05-07 23:55 ` Jonathan Larmour
2003-05-08 0:18 ` Alex Schuilenburg
2003-05-08 3:16 ` Jonathan Larmour
2003-05-08 9:45 ` Alex Schuilenburg
2003-05-07 23:27 ` Alex Schuilenburg
2003-05-06 15:00 ` Jonathan Larmour
2003-05-06 15:06 ` Gary Thomas
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
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=3EB7CC0C.2030800@eCosCentric.com \
--to=jifl@ecoscentric.com \
--cc=andrew.lunn@ascom.ch \
--cc=ecos-maintainers@sources.redhat.com \
--cc=gary@mlbassoc.com \
/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.
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).