On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 19:58, Asheesh Laroia <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, 28 Sep 2010, Danny Piccirillo wrote: > >> On Fri, Sep 24, 2010 at 23:34, Asheesh Laroia <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, 23 Sep 2010, Edward Hervey wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> On Wed, 2010-09-22 at 16:10 -0400, Danny Piccirillo wrote: >>>>> >>>>> * Whoever leaves a comment claiming the bug gets a lock for 48 hours. >>>>> If they submit a patch, the PiTiVi community must review it within 24 >>>>> hours, and if it works, should commit it! And then we say thanks and >>>>> we (and you guys) write a follow-up blog post welcoming the new >>>>> contributor into PiTiVi. >>>> >>>> 48 hours can be really short for solving some bugs, Jeff summed up >>>> most of the issue about that in his mail. >>>> Putting that time limit in your system makes sense, but I wouldn't >>>> stop it having multiple proposals if we take a bit more time reviewing >>>> the patches. >>> >>> You're right. >>> >>> Hey, so -- >>> >>> What bug are we going to use? And then once we figure that out, what >>> should >>> we set the lock duration to? >>> >> >> Is Bug 615570 still a good option? That is, to create a startup window >> for PiTiVi. If so, who would like to help me figure out how to solve >> the bug and document it for a newbie to try? [= > > Maybe you I can give it a shot, writing a first draft, and we can send that > to the PiTiVi IRC channel for review? (I want to minimize the impact on the > PiTiVi team.) >
Sounds excellent-- let's make sure this is a good bug to solve or if we should use another contender -- .danny ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Start uncovering the many advantages of virtual appliances and start using them to simplify application deployment and accelerate your shift to cloud computing. http://p.sf.net/sfu/novell-sfdev2dev _______________________________________________ Pitivi-pitivi mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/pitivi-pitivi
