On 11/08/2017 09:54, Fam Zheng wrote: > On Thu, 08/10 12:25, Cornelia Huck wrote: >>> I think the UI (giving no consideration to how we might implement >>> this!) would ideally be something like: >>> * if anybody mails a patch which touches an "unmaintained" file, >>> a robot should send a reply along the lines of "thanks for the >>> patch; unfortunately file X is not maintained so it may be >>> tricky to get patch review for this. You'll need to be >>> persistent and do more of the legwork than if you were patching >>> a file that did have an active maintainer" so contributors >>> know when they've wandered into the swamp >> >> That's a good idea. >> >>> * some mechanism for easily finding patches to unmaintained >>> files which haven't got review yet, so that anybody with some >>> spare time and interest can move some of them along (the idea >>> being to spread the load rather than trying to designate a >>> particular "owner" for this headache) >> >> Can maybe patchew set a special flag for patches that only touch >> unmaintained files? > > Interesting idea. We have a number of patch status tracking feature requests > for > patchew already. We can tackle them one by one. (The next priority is > implement > "merged".)
Do you use github issues? Paolo
