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

[Chris Rees]

On 27 Apr 2011 12:55, "Jerry" <jerry at seibercom.net> wrote:
>
> On Wed, 27 Apr 2011 11:57:47 +0400
> arrowdodger <6yearold at gmail.com> articulated:
>
> > On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 10:05 AM, John Marino <freebsdml at marino.st>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Several days ago, I submitted a patch for a port I maintain:
> > > ports/156541     "[MAINTAINER] Upgrade lang/gnat-aux to release
> > > version and add C++"
> > >
> > > Nobody has touched it, but many other PRs after that submission
> > > have been assigned, etc.
> >
> > Ha, i've submitted mine about two months ago and still no luck.
>
> Personally, I believe that the current system, if not partially broken,
> is far from ideal. I would prefer to see a system where each submitted
> PR is assigned a specific number (I believe it is actually) and then
> assigned in numeric order to the next available committer. That
> committer would then be responsible for either committing the
> PR/Port/Whatever within a preset time frame, or informing the original
> submitter why the said article was not/could not be approved at the
> present time. Allowing a submitter to languish while pondering what has
> become of their document certainly does seem justified.
>
> I am sure that the old, "But they are all volunteers", or some such
> tirade will erupt. It must be remembered that those who submit items for
> approval are also volunteers.
They deserve at least as much respect as
> those who are actively working on those submitted items.

How do you define respect? I find the committers extremely respectful.

Chris