[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [patch] Fix mordents and pralltriller in

From: Janek Warchoł
Subject: Re: [patch] Fix mordents and pralltriller in
Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 22:41:08 +0100

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 10:33 PM, David Kastrup <address@hidden> wrote:
> Janek Warchoł <address@hidden> writes:
>> On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 4:39 PM, Graham Percival
>> <address@hidden> wrote:
>>> On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 01:39:11PM +0000, James wrote:
>>>> I think this needs to be reviewed just like any other patch should be,
>>>> why *would* we just push this?
>>> Well, I think this one is simple enough to push directly.
>> Shall i do this?
>> And shall i not ask next time? ;)
>>>> I might have missed this but did this have a tracker/patchy test?
>>> I think that was also simple enough not to need an individual
>>> patchy test.  As long as it was pushed to staging and not master,
>>> stuff that simple is fine.
>> That was also my reasoning.  It's unbelievable how much time is spend
>> on patch maintenance...  A simple change can take 5 days (in my case
>> it means 5 days of constant awareness about the patch)...
> The alternatives have shown a tendency to lock up development for
> everyone.  Not everything goes through the full cycle, but it's not rare
> that even "trivial" things get valid comments and corrections.

true and i don't mean to complain.  I just wish i had more time.

> No "constant awareness" is required.  Patches move from Patch-new to
> Patch-review to Patch-countdown to Patch-push without the patch
> originator being required to bother about it.

Doesn't work well in my case.  Until the issue is closed, it's hard
for me to forget about it.


reply via email to

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