[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches
From: |
bokr |
Subject: |
Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches |
Date: |
Thu, 2 Mar 2023 14:57:58 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) |
Hi,
tl;dr:
If you want to expand the list of committers rapidly,
would it make sense to have a sand-box repo for new committers
which trusted committers could channel cherry-picks from?
Pick your bugaboo, but I consider plausible that some
volunteering committers are there on paid job assignment
serving some agenda which you can't easily discover.
Well, that can be good and normal with FLOSS-enlightened emplayers,
but one can imagine not-so-benevolent assignments...
(pick your concept of benevolence :)
On +2023-03-02 12:04:44 +0100, Andreas Enge wrote:
> Hello,
>
> in the current situation I think the suggestion is putting the horse before
> the cart. In a first step before adding policy, we should make the teams
> functional. While working on core-updates, I have been realising we are
> already spread too thin: Some important languages have teams with one or
> two members, who would effectively become bottlenecks. Other software has
> no team (Qt/KDE). All in all, I also think we have too few committers.
> Adding policy might completely stall the project...
>
> If for every trivial update of a Python package we need not only submit a
> patch to the bugtracker, wait for QA, get back to the patch, resign it,
> push it and close the bug, but additionally wait for one of the two Python
> team members to have a look at it (or let an additional week pass),
> incentives to participate will tend to zero.
>
> Your suggested policy can help against commits of too bad quality; but I
> do not think this is our problem, our problem is rather a lack of fast
> progress.
>
> So I think we need to add committers, add committers to teams, encourage
> teams to engage in work, and if everything works smoothly, maybe add policy.
>
> Andreas
>
>
--
Regards,
Bengt Richter
- [bug#61894] [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches, Ludovic Courtès, 2023/03/01
- Re: [bug#61894] [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches, Christopher Baines, 2023/03/01
- Re: [bug#61894] [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches, Björn Höfling, 2023/03/01
- Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches, Ludovic Courtès, 2023/03/01
- Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches, 宋文武, 2023/03/06
- Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches, Andreas Enge, 2023/03/07
- Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches, Simon Tournier, 2023/03/07
- Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches, Maxim Cournoyer, 2023/03/07
- Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches, Leo Famulari, 2023/03/07
- Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches, Maxim Cournoyer, 2023/03/08
- Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches, Simon Tournier, 2023/03/09
- Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches, Efraim Flashner, 2023/03/08
- Re: bug#61894: [PATCH RFC] Team approval for patches, Maxim Cournoyer, 2023/03/08