Fwd: Re: Patch reviewal (was: malloc(0) during exception throw & catch)

Fwd: Re: Patch reviewal (was: malloc(0) during exception throw & catch)

[Denis Perchine]

----------  Forwarded Message  ----------
Subject: Re: Patch reviewal (was: malloc(0) during exception throw & catch)
Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 14:31:34 +0700
From: Denis Perchine <dyp@perchine.com>


> > Yes, some stuff is more sexy than others.
> > I've had patches sit untouched on the mailing-list for over two months,
> > at which time they of course no longer work, since the core has moved
> > beyond that.
> 
> Patches should never remain unreviewed for that long a period. Of course
> it may happen that a patch falls through the cracks, in which case a
> reminder after one month or so seems useful, but two months is a bit
> long.

I completely agree with you. Actually it just shows the organization of the project itself.
I came here from KDE team and after their very well organized structure it is quite
hard to accept this...

> Of course, we are a volunteer project, and considering that, it works
> amazingly well, but when it comes to BSD-specific patches, for example,
> Jeff is usually the only one taking care of them.
> 
> Perhaps we need additional maintainers to take care of "non-sexy" stuff?

Sounds reasonable. Problem is who will do this? People are working for fun here.

-- 
Sincerely Yours,
Denis Perchine

----------------------------------
E-Mail: dyp@perchine.com
HomePage: http://www.perchine.com/dyp/
FidoNet: 2:5000/120.5
----------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------

-- 
Sincerely Yours,
Denis Perchine

----------------------------------
E-Mail: dyp@perchine.com
HomePage: http://www.perchine.com/dyp/
FidoNet: 2:5000/120.5
----------------------------------

Re: Patch reviewal

[Gerald Pfeifer]

On Thu, 8 Jun 2000, Denis Perchine wrote:
>> Patches should never remain unreviewed for that long a period.
> I completely agree with you. Actually it just shows the organization
> of the project itself. I came here from KDE team and after their very
> well organized structure it is quite hard to accept this...

Do you have any suggestions that we could implement?

>> Perhaps we need additional maintainers to take care of "non-sexy" stuff?
> Sounds reasonable. Problem is who will do this? People are working for
> fun here.

I'm sure we can easily find additional system-specific port maintainers.

For example, I feel that this makes sense for the BSDs, which are the only
"free" systems apart from GNU/Linux, yet even SunOS 4.x usually seem to be
reviewed much faster.

Gerald
-- 
Gerald "Jerry" pfeifer@dbai.tuwien.ac.at http://www.dbai.tuwien.ac.at/~pfeifer/

Re: Patch reviewal

[Laurynas Biveinis]

Gerald Pfeifer wrote:
> I'm sure we can easily find additional system-specific port maintainers.

An additional maintainer would be very welcome for DJGPP port. 
Currently Jeff is the only one who applies DJGPP patches and
some of them wait for feedback long time.

Laurynas Biveinis

Re: Patch reviewal

[Marc Espie]

In article < Pine.GSO.4.21.0006081357130.15030-100000@nunki.dbai.tuwien.ac.at > you write:
>I'm sure we can easily find additional system-specific port maintainers.

I'm perfectly willing to take OpenBSD-specific stuff over.
I already handle it in the gcc project. Most patches that find their
way here have already been in production use in the project for some time.
m