The speedy commit of patches...
michael.pyne at kdemail.net
Sat Jun 9 02:05:47 CEST 2007
On Friday 08 June 2007, Scott Wheeler wrote:
> > No offense, I'm just curious. Is there some priority model on what gets
> > commited quick and what has to have more review?
> > I am asking because some people post patches that wait for months while
> > other patches land within days. [...]
> It's not nearly so systematic. For me there are two things that decide
> things -- (a) if I have time to commit it when I read the mail the first
> time and (b) if I can apply it without first spending some time to make
> sure that it's correct.
And in my case it's basically the same thing, modulo the fact that I have very
little free time day to day due to the fact that I'm in the Navy.
So basically at this point in time I can only review patches for bugs that
are "obvious" with fairly simple fixes. Anything harder to reproduce or fix
and I don't really have the time to dedicate to it. :(
Of course I concentrate harder on bugs which are crasher/data loss but I deal
only peripherally with taglib so I'm not knowledgably enough to review a lot
of the harder patches.
The fact that the two bugs that were mailed to the list included patches and
an explanation of the problem helped of course, as all I had to do for review
was verify that the problem existed (and made sense from the symptoms of the
bug report), instead of having to determine what the bug was.
- Michael Pyne
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/taglib-devel/attachments/20070608/a501fe29/attachment.pgp
More information about the taglib-devel