On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 05:14:37PM -0400, ron minnich wrote:
On Sun, May 31, 2009 at 4:41 PM, Peter Stuge peter@stuge.se wrote:
ron minnich wrote:
I would like to request a better patch management system than this mailing list.
it's a hard problem.
..
All in all, I think the process works.
I don't, when patches are untracked and linger for however long until the author or someone else sends a ping, at which point they may get some more attention, or will just continue to linger.
all patches or some patches? Every time I svn, which is almost daily, there are changes.
Clearly, some patches are being reviewed and acked.
Most of them, yes.
I personally think our review/commit process is working very well. Sure, sometimes patches take a little longer to review/test, but that's not a problem of the process itself, it's simply because we have a limited number of developers with a limited amount of time.
There is only one thing I suggest for improvement: if a patch doesn't reveice answers (review, test, ack, nack) after 2 weeks or so, the developer (or pretty much any user/developer on this list) should either
(a) Post a *ping* mail, maybe the patch was just not noticed or forgotten and will then be swiftly reviewed/committed.
(b) Add a trac issue, containing the URL to the mailing list post of the patch, so that it doesn't get forgotten.
Other than that, the process works just fine, and I strongly believe that adding _more_ (web-based or other) tools in the mix will make things worse, not better. We already have trac for issues, no need for more tools.
Uwe.