On 28 Jul 2009, at 22:15, William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
Totally in support of STATUS for backports; this code differs
enough that
it's no longer a backport. The toolkit wrappers alone were
significantly
re-factored between these branches.
There are other proposals that are not backports. STATUS is about
review, regardless of whether a proposal is a simple backport or
bears little or no relationship with /trunk/.
I'm not objecting to the patch, I'm objecting to bypassing the
*process* that flags it up for my attention! Now it's in STATUS,
if it reaches +3 and gets backported, that''s just fine, whether
or not I've reviewed it myself by then.
--
Nick Kew
