Is there any interest in a commit-fest, where we can work through the backlog of patches in an flurry of commits/discards?
On Fri, Oct 10, 2008 at 4:16 AM, Esteve Fernandez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tuesday 07 October 2008 17:15:43 Bryan Duxbury wrote: >> I agree that we have a problem. I think that we might need more >> committers, to be honest. There are a lot more libraries than there >> are people in charge at the moment, so clearly any patch that needs >> to get committed will have to go through one of these few people. It >> would also be nice to have at least a clear point person for every >> library so there's someone to email. I know that we have people in >> charge of a few libraries, but definitely not all of them. > > I completely agree with you. It's obvious that some of the people who report > issues have a steady interest in improving particular areas of Thrift. For > example, we at Fluidinfo use Python heavily, and have already contributed > code that may not be of interest to all those who are subscribed to this > list, but that might be useful to others who are not deeply involved in the > Thrift community. > > I'm particularly thinking of our Twisted code (sorry if it sounds pushy, but > it's just an example that describes this situation), which may help those who > are already using Twisted and cannot use the standard blocking RPC mechanism > that comes with Thrift. It's a relatively obscure combination > (Thrift+Twisted), but we believe it could be useful. Also, we want to release > more stuff that uses this as free software, but we don't want to track Thrift > ourselves and maintain a forked version, though. > > Cheers. > >
