Hi everybody, Slightly looser review policy? ------------------------------ I propose we loosen up the patch review policy just a tiny bit. The idea would be that anybody on the review team can just push patches to things that don't really need formal review:
- contrib - homepage - distribution/packaging stuff - build system - regression tests (?) This basically means anything but the source and documentation. If nobody says anything by the sprint, I'm taking this as assent (except for the regression tests bit, which some may find objectionable) Questions for new features -------------------------- Perhaps it'd be useful if we some rough template for how to deal with new features. I was initially going to phrase this as 'formalising our resistance to new features' because I believe that it's a easy to accumulate things and inch our way towards bloat if we aren't careful enough. But on further reflection, I think we can see this also as way of helping people to implement new features, by giving them a little better idea what to expect and also a little more confidence about how well things will go over. I think we want to get some kind of clarity on what to do with them fairly quickly, so maybe a standard list of questions to answer would be good. Here's a first stab: 1. To what extent does this make new things possible (as opposed to simply more convenient)? 2. Does this change any pre-existing workflows? Does this introduce any incompatibilities? 3. What are the possible unintended interactions with other pre-existing features? 4. What are the alternative approaches to solving the same problem? Why do we prefer this one? Thoughts, comments? If people like these ideas, we can stick them on the wiki for future use by patch reviewers. -- Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow> PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9
pgp1YH2j9Zpcz.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
