Re: Patch meister

[Graham Percival]

On Thu, Jun 23, 2011 at 09:31:45PM -0600, Colin Campbell wrote:
> I could take it on, Graham.  In some ways it's just a bit further
> and more formal than the "screening" I've been trying to do.

ok, great!  I was just discussing the "needs work" aspect with
James because he has an incredibly powerful new computer, so could
you get started with the patch countdown?

In 24 hours or more (after Sat 13:00 UK time), please send a
"PATCHES: 48-hour countdown for..." email.


if you notice any "needs_work" patch that should/could be
"review", then by all means change it -- but sending out the patch
countdowns takes priority.

> I'd suggest a minor edit on your blog though: after the list of
> steps in "You can help", you might s/need/mind ;>

heh, yeah.  Thanks, fixed.

> A related question, though: how do we go about tying issues and
> patches closer together?

At the moment, I don't want to cause any disruption to the current
development.

> It would be extremely valuable either to
> *require* that anything on reitveld have a formal issue number, even
> if it's a dev contributing a "hey, look what I wrote" enhancement,
> or to look for a different platform which combines issue tracking
> with patch management.

We certainly want to look for a different platform; that's on the
GOP list.

> As it sits, reitveld doesn't manage
> projects, only developers, and the issues on code.google.com don't
> reflect all the issues/patched needing attention. Should we start a
> GOP discussion, at least to get the views of the developer community
> on record?

At the moment, let's blunder forward as usual.  Yes, this means
more work for you, me, and James... but it's only about 15-30
minutes of extra admin overhead each week, and there's bigger fish
to fry in GOP.  I think we'll get around to a GOP discussion about
this stuff in August?

Cheers,
- Graham