Hei hei, Am Montag, 8. Juni 2020, 10:13:29 CEST schrieb Vincent Breiner: > My apologies for coming off rude. It wasn't my intention to undermine > Denys's long and significant contribution to the project nor to suggest he > should be replaced. Yet, if you look at the previous three months and the > ones before that, there _is_ a clear deviance in activity. Not to mention > the last commit was a CVE fix which is clearly important but is not a good > example of handling routine patches from the mailing list. Generally > speaking, the current pending time for a patch seems unusually long, how > come such an important project only has one active maintainer?
From my experience, busybox is no different here than a lot of other important free software projects. I could name a few just from the top of my head, and it's probably easy to list a lot more. I guess it's always some sort of: 1. project works fine with one single maintainer, until … 2. nobody cares enough to co-maintain … 3. project receives no funding/donations … (remember GnuPG?) 4. … Before forking (and attracting yourself a lot of work, maintainership requires time, dedication, responsibility, responsiveness, …) I would suggest the following (as already said by others): - review patches, this can basically done by everbody, you don't need permission to reply to a patch on a public mailing list and add your 'Reviewed-by:' (you should of course do a good review, and maybe build up trust in your reviews takes some time) - test patches (Tested-by: is certainly also welcome) - if you want to help the maintainer: offer your help Sometimes, there may be reasons to fork a project, but in most cases I saw in the past, there would have been no real need. Talk to the maintainer and find a way to support the existing project, that's possible most of the time. Kind regards Alex _______________________________________________ busybox mailing list [email protected] http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
