Hi there, I'm just a powerless, yet happy, pass user. I'm glad to see this matter getting some attention and that's why I feel the need to reply on this thread.
We're in 2015 A.D. We have DVCS and people feeling the need to get involved with things they like|use. I see no point on relying in such an old, hard to scale process like sending patches to a mailing list. I say that being one tied to traditions myself: I'm a Slackware user. Best wishes, Deny Dias. Em qui 23 abr 2015, às 09:37:20, Mike Charlton escreveu: > Sorry for the slow response. I was hoping some more people would chip in > ;-) Possibly they didn't notice the discussion due to the unrelated > subject line. I have fixed that now :-) > > I can understand that it is kind of an embarrassing situation. How many > patches are still waiting to be reviewed? It is kind of unfortunate that > the patch request mechanism is this list since it makes it difficult to > find all the patches. Mailman seems to lack a frontend for searching the > entire archive (I was sure I saw one one time, but I can't seem to figure > it out at the moment). > > Anyway, pass is an important project for me. Although I'm not planning to > do any development on it in the near future, I'm worried that the lack of a > place for people to submit patches will ultimately drive people away. > > I have noticed that Jason has some activity on Github in the recent past, > so he is not without access to the internet. If anyone personally knows > him, I wonder if they wouldn't mind pinging him to see if he has any > objection to delegating some authority for accepting patches, at least into > a separate branch. Failing that, I noticed that you, Lenz, have merged > code before so I assume you have the ability to create a new branch and > merge into it. The "checked by 3 people" seems like a reasonably high > level to aspire to. I promise, for my part, to review any patches that are > sent in. > > On 18 April 2015 at 16:03, Lenz Weber <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Yes, I've been thinking about something like that for a while now, too. > > > > Problem is, while it would be easy to add smaller patches & fixes (and > > it would prove a very valuable tool for that), decisions that would add > > code refactorings would have to be controlled thoroughly, if added at > > all - the same for patches that add real new functionality (new command > > line switches), or that changes the behaviour of pass. > > > > Something like that would need a "checked thoroughly by three people on > > the mailing list and deemed as useful"-approach or something..? > > > > On 18.04.2015 04:51, Mike Charlton wrote: > > > On 17 April 2015 at 15:55, Dahlberg, David > > > <[email protected] > > > <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: > > > > > > I'd pretty much like to get some comments (or better a commit) about > > > this patch that I posted onto the list a while ago, so that I could > > > proceed with the rest that is already waiting. > > > > > > > > > This seems to be a bit of a common pattern (with some people waiting the > > > better part of a year to get a patch in). While I can understand that > > > life can take you away from a project (I haven't updated some of the > > > projects I maintain in a couple of years) I worry that people will walk > > > away from this gem of a project. > > > > > > Can I suggest adding a branch to the git repository (maybe called > > > staging or something) where people can submit changes without having to > > > wait for the maintainer's approval. The active members of the list can > > > review the code and make suggestions so that work isn't stalled unduly. > > > Then when the maintainer feels like he has the capacity to review what > > > has happened he can cherry pick from staging at will. > > > > > > The upside of this scheme is that those of us who wish to use the > > > features that are coming as patches will be able to do so easily by > > > simply using the staging branch. The downside is that if the maintainer > > > doesn't come back, it could possibly lead to a fork (although if people > > > get too annoyed they might just fork anyway). > > > > > > Just a thought... > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > > Password-Store mailing list > > > [email protected] > > > http://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/password-store > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Password-Store mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/password-store > > _______________________________________________ Password-Store mailing list [email protected] http://lists.zx2c4.com/mailman/listinfo/password-store
