Hi, On Thu, May 01, 2014 at 08:06:46PM +0300, Samuli Seppänen wrote: > A few notes about where we get our patches from... in the documentation > we do say that "post the patch to openvpn-devel list". That was a > decision that was reached some years ago. However, we, in practice, do > accept patches from Trac, GitHub and IRC. We should probably change the > documentation to reflect this.
Actually, openvpn-devel *is* the way, with trac being second (due to
the way we reference every commit to a mail on openvpn-devel, trac
patches basically need someone re-sending them to the list).
Github and IRC are *not* a welcome input for patches, because it doesn't
match the agreed-upon workflow ("ack or nack on the list, reference that
message in the commit"), and doesn't have the benefit of trac to be
tied to a ticket that can be set to a given milestone, etc.
IRC is very welcome to bounce around ideas ("should we fix this? if
yes, in which way?") but it needs to result in a patch being sent to
openvpn-devel. Actually, this is often the reason why some patches get
ACKed much quicker than others - they have been discussed, the reason
for the change is well-understood, and for complicated stuff, the details
how to tackle it might have been agreed-upon beforehand.
gert
--
USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!
//www.muc.de/~gert/
Gert Doering - Munich, Germany g...@greenie.muc.de
fax: +49-89-35655025 g...@net.informatik.tu-muenchen.de
pgp_wSXsMU7Y1.pgp
Description: PGP signature
