Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> writes:
> It should be clear that more maintainers and developers with direct > access are needed for patches to be applied timely. > > I am sure that those on emacs-devel mailing list, Emacs developers, > they could help on that, but maybe some of them do not observe this > mailing list. > > Number of not applied patches does not seem to be that large. > > Project leader shall have his team and delegate them to other > developers. > > This situation badly contradicts to Org mode purposes which is meant > to manage patches. > > Maybe there shall be a published list of developers and project > managers, so that this type of communication may be addressd > properly. As now original poster explained the problem, but I did not > see response from none of pushers, I mean those who have repository > access. > > So how many people are there who have repository access? > > Who is not busy but willing to apply at least 1-5 patches pending? > I'm not sure I agree with this analysis. As Timothy mentioned a few times, the issue is NOT about the time taken to apply patches. It is about a lack of feedback regarding the state of the patches. Increasing the number of people with the ability to apply patches/changes to the repository is unlikely to be helpful. It could in fact have the reverse result, leading to increased inconsistency and reduced stability. I find bug fixes are applied very quickly. Enhancements and extensions are introduced more conservatively, but I think that is a positive rather than negative aspect of org development. For many users, org is already very feature rich/complete. -- Tim Cross
