Re: new procedure

[dead_orc <ml...@de...>]

Darn, this didn't go to the list, so here again (Sorry Jason, you'll receive this mail twice)

Jason Woofenden wrote:
> Hi all,
> 
> I think it's time to shift my role a bit. When we originally discussed
> my role as patch commiter, we agreed that I would commit patches from
> the mailing list that the group agreed were good. But lately, only a
> minority of patches sent to the list get any sort of comment at all.
> And it seems that some readers are waiting for patches to hit
> -unofficial before testing.
> 
> So I propose we shift my role to one of these:
> 
> 1) If patches sent to the list look good to me and I test it and it
> works for me, I push it to -unofficial. If later the group decides
> they don't like the patch, we revert it. For patches I'm unsure of or
> cannot test, I wait for feedback from the group.
> 
> 2) Same as above, but I make sure there's at least 3 days between when
> a patch is mailed into the mailing list and when I push it to
> -unofficial (so there's time for feedback from the group first.)
> 
> What do you all think? Prefer one of the above? Have other suggestions?
> 
> Take care,   - Jason

I'd vote for 1). I'm not that good in C, so reading the patches doesn't
make sense for me. And I'm not that good with git either (I mainly use
Mercurial, and only for myself), so I don't know how to manage many
branches from different locations. So it would be much more convenient
for me to just git pull the changes from the official -unofficial
repository and test them (I happily do a make clean && ./configure &&
make && make install to test updates and report back bugs, but messing
around with patches and branches without really knowing what I'm
doing...)

My two cents,
dead_orc