On 14 Apr 2014 08:42, R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 08:18:13 -0400, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com
wrote:
On 14 Apr 2014 01:56, Stephen J. Turnbull step...@xemacs.org wrote:
mar...@v.loewis.de writes:
For gaining commit access, it's really more
On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 10:41 AM, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On 14 Apr 2014 08:42, R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
When considering who we give commit access to, I think we would be
well served to start giving more weight to the quality of the code
reviews that
On 14 Apr 2014 08:42, R. David Murray rdmur...@bitdance.com wrote:
Or to put it another way, I'd like to encourage contributors who
want to get commit access to focus just as much on doing good
reviews as they do on writing new patches. Currently the focus is
all on getting patches
On 4/15/2014 12:15 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
I've always really liked MvL's 5-reviews-to-get-1 approach.
The only thing I don't like about it[3] is that it puts an explicit
price on core developer time (my time is worth 5x as much as
yours).
Not really true since any of the 5 could be
Terry Reedy writes:
On 4/15/2014 12:15 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
The only thing I don't like about it[3] is that it puts an
explicit price on core developer time (my time is worth 5x as
much as yours).
Not really true
But that is *not* your call! It's for the would-be
On 14 Apr 2014 01:56, Stephen J. Turnbull step...@xemacs.org wrote:
mar...@v.loewis.de writes:
For gaining commit access, it's really more important that the patch
is factually finished, than that it's author believes it to. If people
get it right the first time often enough, they get
On Mon, 14 Apr 2014 08:18:13 -0400, Nick Coghlan ncogh...@gmail.com wrote:
On 14 Apr 2014 01:56, Stephen J. Turnbull step...@xemacs.org wrote:
mar...@v.loewis.de writes:
For gaining commit access, it's really more important that the patch
is factually finished, than that it's author
Benjamin Peterson writes:
I don't think Nikolaus is wrong to post here. I often tell people that
sometimes the only way to get your patches in is to constantly poke us
about it.
I admit the tone was biased toward nagging or blaming the victim,
and again I apologize for causing
On 4/13/2014 2:36 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
[snip]
My claim is that in current circumstances,
core-mentorship would be a more *effective* channel because
- core-mentorship is *explicitly* for poking Those Who Can Help
(among other requests for help);
- a surprisingly large (to me,
Janzert writes:
On 4/13/2014 2:36 AM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
[snip]
My claim is that in current circumstances,
core-mentorship would be a more *effective* channel because
- core-mentorship is *explicitly* for poking Those Who Can Help
(among other requests for help);
Le 13/04/2014 03:07, Benjamin Peterson a écrit :
On Sat, Apr 12, 2014, at 17:30, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
I apologize for the tone. I need to go *right* now, and can't fix
that. Really, I'm sympathetic and my goal is not just to defend
python-dev, but to help you get the reviews your work
Am 13.04.14 03:07, schrieb Benjamin Peterson:
On Sat, Apr 12, 2014, at 17:30, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
I apologize for the tone. I need to go *right* now, and can't fix
that. Really, I'm sympathetic and my goal is not just to defend
python-dev, but to help you get the reviews your work
Am 13.04.14 08:36, schrieb Stephen J. Turnbull:
I admit the tone was biased toward nagging or blaming the victim,
and again I apologize for causing misunderstanding. Nikolaus isn't
wrong for posting here. My claim is that in current circumstances,
core-mentorship would be a more *effective*
On 4/13/2014 2:46 PM, Martin v. Löwis wrote:
As for the request Are you sure that the patch is ready: this is
*very* difficult to answer for the author. We all have experienced
that patches that we considered good were critized out of nowhere,
and I just did the same to Nikolaus. There is just
Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu writes:
[Quote conveniently rearranged]
I've accumulated a number of patches in the issue tracker that are
waiting for someone to review/commit/reject them. I'm eager to make
corrections as necessary, I just need someone to look the work that I've
done so far:
Do
Stephen J. Turnbull step...@xemacs.org writes:
I apologize for the tone. I need to go *right* now, and can't fix
that. Really, I'm sympathetic and my goal is not just to defend
python-dev, but to help you get the reviews your work deserves.
Please read with that in mind.
Will do - but why
Martin v. Löwis mar...@v.loewis.de writes:
Am 13.04.14 08:36, schrieb Stephen J. Turnbull:
I admit the tone was biased toward nagging or blaming the victim,
and again I apologize for causing misunderstanding. Nikolaus isn't
wrong for posting here. My claim is that in current circumstances,
Nikolaus Rath writes:
I've described the status of each bug in more detail in my reply
Terry, but generally all the issues contain a testcase (i.e., so I
consider them confirmed), do not require a PEP, contain a patch that
needs review and include documentation updates. I have signed the
Martin v. Löwis writes:
Am 13.04.14 08:36, schrieb Stephen J. Turnbull:
- core-mentorship is *explicitly* for poking Those Who Can Help
(among other requests for help);
It would be worth an experiment. I know that I wouldn't have reviewed
Nikolaus' patches if he had posted to
Quoting Stephen J. Turnbull step...@xemacs.org:
Your modesty is not in question. :-) An explicit statement that These
are ready allows an experienced developer to give you feedback not
only about whether the patches are in fact ready, but whether your
judgment about patches is ready for
mar...@v.loewis.de writes:
For gaining commit access, it's really more important that the patch
is factually finished, than that it's author believes it to. If people
get it right the first time often enough, they get commit access.
Yes, that's what I had in mind, but I guess I explained
Hello,
I've accumulated a number of patches in the issue tracker that are
waiting for someone to review/commit/reject them. I'm eager to make
corrections as necessary, I just need someone to look the work that I've
done so far:
* http://bugs.python.org/issue20951 (SSLSocket.send() returns 0 for
On 4/12/2014 2:58 PM, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
I've accumulated a number of patches in the issue tracker that are
waiting for someone to review/commit/reject them. I'm eager to make
corrections as necessary, I just need someone to look the work that I've
done so far:
If I did not have several
On 12 Apr 2014 18:08, Terry Reedy tjre...@udel.edu wrote:
On 4/12/2014 2:58 PM, Nikolaus Rath wrote:
I realize that core developer time is scarce, so I have started to only
work on patches after I've confirmed that someone is available and
interested to review them. However, it would be great
I apologize for the tone. I need to go *right* now, and can't fix
that. Really, I'm sympathetic and my goal is not just to defend
python-dev, but to help you get the reviews your work deserves.
Please read with that in mind.
Steve
Nikolaus Rath writes:
I've accumulated a number of patches
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 04/12/2014 08:30 PM, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
it's a matter of time before the contribution is integrated.
Our current backlog is bad enough that many contributions are effectively
wasted: they rot on the vine before they can be merged.
On Sat, Apr 12, 2014, at 17:30, Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
I apologize for the tone. I need to go *right* now, and can't fix
that. Really, I'm sympathetic and my goal is not just to defend
python-dev, but to help you get the reviews your work deserves.
Please read with that in mind.
I don't
27 matches
Mail list logo
