So question:

What constitutes an ack?  I posted up 60 odd patches over the last few days
and only have gotten some conversation around 2-3 of those patches.  Are
the rest, by omission, assumed to be ok then?

donald

On Thu, Nov 12, 2015 at 12:21 PM, Paul Jakma <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Thu, 12 Nov 2015, Jafar Al-Gharaibeh wrote:
>
>   Technically, I don't think there is a way around this - write access
>> will not be turned loose. The privileged group will be made bigger, maybe
>> covering everyone on the dev list if that what you mean by "community,
>> practically eliminating "privileged" within that community. Someone has to
>> still give write access to developers. When/who grant write access?
>>
>
> There are practicalities, but you can frame things a certain way. E.g.,
> the one doing the final push to 'master' can be a 'secretary' or a
> 'facilitator'. Labels are funny, they matter. :)
>
> To flip it around, if having commit access means you have an easier time
> getting your stuff in - all else being equal - then that means the process
> is borken right? (unless pretty much everyone has commit access). Certainly
> those without the commit access and with equally good patches would think
> so, wouldn't they? And this has been the case for a long time. Not through
> malice, but simply cause the community out grew the original model.
>
> So we need to get to a point where the question of commit access is a
> boring one, no?
>
> The recent "rounds" system, and queueing everything up, and filtering out
> only the stuff that breaks or raises comments, hopefully goes toward that.
> Or not?
>
> (I have sneaked one or two things in even with that, but really trivial
> compile fixes only - I hope).
>
> I like this idea, it means patches are quickly integrated which everyone
>> on this wants probably. what if this is your first patch/contribution?
>>
>
> It goes in.
>
> Presumably, if people don't recognise the name, they'll be more likely to
> give the patch a good look.
>
> That's why it's good to do this in a staged, cyclical fashion too. Make it
> clear what's proposed to go in, and give people a chance to review and
> comment. ??
>
> regards,
> --
> Paul Jakma      [email protected]  @pjakma Key ID: 64A2FF6A
> Fortune:
>            THE DAILY PLANET
>
>         SUPERMAN SAVES DESSERT!
>         Plans to "Eat it later"
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Quagga-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-dev
>
_______________________________________________
Quagga-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.quagga.net/mailman/listinfo/quagga-dev

Reply via email to