FWIW, I just received this message from someone at Facebook: - I was dragged into some other stuff, but as I have a code running under twisted, and want to expose data I am collecting via thrift, it is important for me. I will go back to this either this weekend, or early next week.
David Reiss wrote: > I feel that this would be acceptable, and that the conflict of interest > would be minor at most. > > --David > > Terry Jones wrote: >> Hi David >> >>> As to the specific issue of the Twisted patch, this is a pretty significant >>> amount of code that takes some specialized knowledge to review competently. >>> I know someone who might be able to invest the time to do so, but I think >>> contributors are going to have to be patient with such difficult-to-review >>> patches. >> I'm qualified to review the Twisted patch, and happy to do so. >> >> BUT, Esteve works with me, so I'm not fully independent. However, I didn't >> have any input into that code - apart from agreeing that it was something >> he should do. I have not looked at the code at all, though I've used it >> with success. >> >> If I'm considered independent enough that my review would count (and I >> meant count in the sense of getting the patch across the line, not just >> count as an additional thumbs up), I'll go for it. I don't mean that in >> negative sense. I mean that if I'm not considered independent enough, I'd >> rather put time to better use, like reviewing some other Python patch where >> there'd be no question of conflict of interest, etc. >> >> Regards, >> Terry
