RE: PATCH keyword, again
- From: Murray Cumming Comneon com
- To: jdub perkypants org, desktop-devel-list gnome org
- Subject: RE: PATCH keyword, again
- Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2004 13:36:46 +0100
> <quote who="Murray Cumming Comneon com">
> > In summary, I believe that the neglected-patches problem is a major
> > obstacle to contributing to GNOME. I believe that
> co-maintainers are
> > the answer, and I think that we (the community/foundation board)
> > should maybe declare that all modules should have >1 maintainer.
> > Single points of failure are bad.
> We, particularly the Foundation Board (who have *nothing* to
> do with this at all), can not impose this kind of arbitrary
> decision on maintainers.
> We can encourage it, we can say that
> it's a good idea, etc., etc., but we can't enforce or impose it.
Yes. I suggest that we recommend co-maintainership (or "maintainership
mentoring") in a how-to-be-a-maintainer guide that thomasvs
( http://www.advogato.org/person/thomasvs/diary.html?start=128 )
is working on at the moment. I'd like that guide to explain the importance
of reviewing patches quickly. Thomas, I guess you know about this already?:
> (Personally, I don't even think it makes sense for every
Do you have examples of any modules for which it would not make sense?
> It's a nice idea, but we should deal with problems as
> they arise, and maintainers should be the people making the
> decisions about how to maintain their modules.)
Of course, but within acceptable limits, I think.
murrayc usa net
] [Thread Prev