On Fri, 2008-07-18 at 09:54 -0400, Andrew Conkling wrote: > On Fri, Jul 18, 2008 at 9:19 AM, Peter de Kraker <banshee umito nl> > wrote: > I still have some patches on bugzilla with no comments. I > don't know if that means they are not interesting enough to > include or spend time on, or that just nobody looked / forgot, > or some of them I even didn't post here which is then my > "fault". > Especially for the lastfm cover fetcher patch I would like to > see some action, so I know I don't code for nothing, but can > actually contribute. The other three ones are very small, so > can't be that hard to judge/decide. > > This came up recently: > > > 2008/7/10 David Nielsen <gnomeuser gmail com>: > One reason your bugreport has not yet had any comments might > be that both of the lead developers are in Istanbul for the > GUADEC conference to present on Banshee. But fear not they > will be back shortly, and then we can bother them to comment > on all this nice new feature code. > > > Aside from GUADEC, there have been some patches that have fallen > through the cracks (and there are currently 57 bugs without any > review: > http://bugzilla.gnome.org/reports/patch-report.cgi?product=banshee&patch-status=none). For my part, I can (generally) keep up with the bugs, but can't really advise about patches since I honestly don't know the code very well. Perhaps Aaron or Gabriel (or some of the other contributors) could address the patch statuses (and how someone like me could help) when they return from GUADEC and catch up on email. :) I've been trying to keep an eye on patches, and after a suggestion from Gabriel, sent an "Pending Patches Periodical" a month ago to this list. I was just thinking about doing another issue. But I think we need a more structured way of doing this, hence my idea : We could use the patch status "reviewed" to indicate that someone has looked at the patch and is fairly confident it's good. Gabriel and Aaron would then only have to look at those "reviewed" patches and give their final approval (or reject). These would allow our dear but busy maintainers to keep an eye on what getting into the codebase, but hopefully avoid having so much patches in limbo. Suggestions and comments welcome ! -- Bertrand Lorentz <bertrand lorentz gmail com> > http://flickr.com/photos/bl8/ <
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part