How are [MAINTAINER] patches handled and why aren't PRs FIFO?
roberthuff at rcn.com
Wed Apr 27 12:51:22 UTC 2011
> > 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.
Not all committers are created equal. Asking Joe-the-fonts-
guru to work on Mary's network monitoring application is probably
Keeping a centralized list of who/what pairs - more
importantly, keeping it useful - is another job on someone's desk.
Are you that someone?
> I am sure that the old, "But they are all volunteers", or some
> such tirade will erupt.
Not a tirade, but ... guilty.
> 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.
Am I correct you are asking for a (far) higher level of
dedication from the committers than from those who submit changes?
Consider the port that goes untouched (in spite of substantial
upstream changes) for months or even years; someone picks up the
torch, and the poor committer gets N-thousend lines of new features,
security patches, and dependency changes dumped on them to be
checked in ... how long was that?
Do I think there are flaws in the current system? Sure.
But as long as we're faced with this particular choice of evils
- slow updating versus lowered quality - I vote "first, do no harm".
More information about the freebsd-ports