> Am 06.07.2010 21:55, schrieb Remy Blank: > One thing that hold me back of doing that with the ticket system so far > was that I had the impression that my patches would be rejected anyway > as core trac does not *want* to go in this direction. > > As Noah said, we're living in an economy of time. I'm willing to spend > some time to implement something incrementally and for some core ticket > parts I pretty much know how this could be done as I've already done that. > > However I need at least the commitment that a functionality will be > included into trac core provided that it meets trac's architecture and > the quality standards. I can't risk spending a lot of time (a week of > free time is a lot for me currently) when the feature can not go into > trac anyway.
Putting up Felix's statement, that one cannot be sure of integration of a proposal being made. How about moving the trac development process further along the road by having something like for example PEPs, e.g. TEP? In addition, one could initiate a TEP by first proposing an idea, and if that idea takes off (voting), one could propose a solution for that TEP that is then to be integrated into trac based on code review etc. -- Carsten -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Trac Development" group. To post to this group, send email to trac-...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to trac-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/trac-dev?hl=en.
