[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: state of the release: the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: state of the release: the Good, the Bad, and the Ugly
Date: Thu, 27 May 2010 15:05:52 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux)

Valentin Villenave <address@hidden> writes:

> On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 3:39 PM, Graham Percival
> <address@hidden> wrote:
>> We have 10 issues with patches attached; 3 of them fixing Critical
>> issues.  Some people might view this as a positive thing -- hey, we
>> have people sending fixes! -- but I'm counting this as "ugly" because
>> it means that we're not supporting each other enough.  I'd like to
>> see a more effort put towards reviewing and finishing patches.
> This is one of the few areas left where we still rely upon Han-Wen a
> lot, and do not (AFAICS) a properly-organized team as we (kinda) have
> wrt bugs, frogs, docs etc. The deal with David's recent patches show
> that IMHO: although nobody really objected with merging his patches
> (and although diplomacy is certainly not his strongest point),

Looks like there is a job opening for patch diplomat.  No, I won't

> nobody really felt that actually committing the patches was their job.

The problem is that committing a patch suggests some basic
responsibility.  If a patch is not within the comfort zone of
prospective committers, it tends to rot.

> Which brings up the question of the tools we use:
> - Rietveld doesn't allow to keep track of lilypond-related patches,[1]
> - [Patch]-marked mails on -devel don't work,

How comes?

> - "Patch"-tagged issued on the tracker don't seem to work either...
> It has been suggested in the past (by you) that we could use another
> mailing list, either specifically for patches-reviewing, or on the
> contrary for all non-patch-related discussions that usually clutter
> the -devel list.

I think that the developer list is for development, and that includes

I also think that "Signed-off-by" tends to work somewhat more formally
than "LGTM" does.

> I've been reading (actually, discovering) the CG over the past few
> weeks, and I have to say it seems quite complete and up-to-date to me.

It does not help with explaining the internals of Lilypond all too much,
but then nothing does right now.

> On a personal note, I'm sorry for not having been more available this
> year. I can't wait to work on LilyPond again!

In a healthy project, contributors come and go.  If you instead only see
the same faces leaving and returning, something is amiss that makes
starting to contribute hard.

David Kastrup

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]