Sounds like you need to define who are all involved and what they're expected roles are. It would be nice to have a constant review board but the reality is sometimes the case where the board does not review in a timely fashion and commits in cue become stagnant. Changing or mirroring repos doesn't seem like it will help the situation though perhaps a staging area could work. The ml isn't an ideal place for this but it could work if everyone involved are taking part and communicating effectively. The situation as it is now is that everyone wants a bug fixed or feature added but the lack of manpower and complexity of the project makes it difficult or even impossible to do. It seems to me that instead of screening new commits which would stifle progress, the matter on the table should be to define known bugs that we want to fix and have everyone collaborate to work on getting the major blockers out of the way from creating a stable release.
_______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.compiz.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
