On Tue, Mar 05, 2013 at 02:46:28AM +0000, adrelanos wrote: > So if somehow the time between posting a patch, reviewing a patch and > merging a patch could be reduced, that would be awesome.
That is certainly one of the challenging points. Once upon a time when there was roughly 1 Tor developer, we put a priority on reviewing patches from external folks -- since if you review it quickly enough, it makes the volunteers create more patches, and everybody wins. Now that there are n Tor developers though, there's always a choice between reading the patch from the volunteer, and reading the patch from the paid developer. Clearly the answer is "do both, they're both important!", but that answer doesn't really work. In summary, yes, finding better answers to this topic is one of the jobs of our shiny new project coordinator (woo!). > What happened to the job offer for another browser hacker? [1] No > suitable person has been found? > [1] https://blog.torproject.org/blog/tor-has-funding-another-browser-hacker We got one. Actually two. https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/timeline?author=mcs&ticket=on&ticket_details=on&update=Update https://trac.torproject.org/projects/tor/timeline?author=brade&ticket=on&ticket_details=on&update=Update http://pearlcrescent.com/about/ If you run across more great Firefox hackers, we could in theory fund more. --Roger _______________________________________________ tor-talk mailing list [email protected] https://lists.torproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/tor-talk
