How are [MAINTAINER] patches handled and why aren't PRs FIFO?

[Chris Rees]

On 27 April 2011 13:54, Jerry <jerry at seibercom.net> wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 13:00:17 +0100
> Chris Rees <utisoft at gmail.com> articulated:
>
>> How do you define respect? I find the committers extremely respectful.
>
> Allowing a submitter to languish for an indeterminate period without
> any notification of what is transpiring with his/her submission is not
> respectful, it is benign neglect.
>
> As I stated, each submitted item should be handled in a basic FIFO
> order unless there is a specific reason for not doing so. If such
> reason exists then the original submitter should be informed of this
> irregularity. Waiting for months while items submitted after the
> submitter's item are approved without notifying the submitter of why is
> certainly not friendly or respectful, unless of course you work for
> the motor vehicle or parking department in which case it is just
> business as usual.
>
> I have been at both extremes of the spectrum on this, having had items
> committed within days and conversely waiting for an extended period of
> time and finally asking specifically why an item was not committed
> before anything happened. The present system is broken, or at the very
> least poorly implemented, unless the goal is to keep a submitter in the
> dark. I reiterate, there is no logical reason to jump over one user's
> submission and proceed with another user's submission without formally
> notifying the submitter of the older item why his/her item is being
> bypassed.
>


I believe the standard protocol is to jump on IRC and ask for advice
-- it could be something very little -- or it's been lost in the swarm
(less likely).

I honestly don't think that there's much wrong with the system as it
is; once you get better at making submissions, taking time to read the
Porter's Handbook your patches become committed more and more quickly.


Chris