Yeah, that was me. I've since stopped, and I'm talking with Tor Lindqvist about how I could be more useful. He's suggesting I go through the list of unloved patches and review them, which sounds fair enough. Philip On Sun, 2007-05-27 at 12:39 -0400, Matthias Clasen wrote: > On 3/15/07, Federico Mena Quintero <federico ximian com> wrote: > > > Your mission, should you decide to accept it, is to do this: > > > > - Get the latest GTK+ from svn trunk. > > > > - Go through each of the unreviewed patches and classify them > > informally: > > > > - obsolete patch which does not apply "as-is" to the sources > > (you can use "patch --dry-run" to test this easily without > > screwing up your source tree) > > - big patch which needs detailed testing/review > > - small patch which could be tested/reviewed in a few minutes > > > > I see that somebody took up this task now. While I appreciate the effort, > I don't think that a mere applies/doesn't apply small/big classification of > patches helps _that_ much with the patch review. > > I have started a small patch review checklist in > http://live.gnome.org/GtkTasks#P1 > that should help people who want to bring patches in good shape. > > Matthias > _______________________________________________ > gtk-devel-list mailing list > gtk-devel-list gnome org > http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/gtk-devel-list
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part