This is the mail archive of the
libc-alpha@sourceware.org
mailing list for the glibc project.
Re: Pinging patches
- From: "Carlos O'Donell" <carlos at systemhalted dot org>
- To: "Joseph S. Myers" <joseph at codesourcery dot com>
- Cc: libc-alpha at sourceware dot org
- Date: Fri, 2 Mar 2012 12:29:47 -0500
- Subject: Re: Pinging patches
- Authentication-results: mr.google.com; spf=pass (google.com: domain of patofiero@gmail.com designates 10.236.175.36 as permitted sender) smtp.mail=patofiero@gmail.com; dkim=pass header.i=patofiero@gmail.com
- References: <Pine.LNX.4.64.1203012102270.2578@digraph.polyomino.org.uk>
n Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 4:07 PM, Joseph S. Myers <joseph@codesourcery.com> wrote:
> Although we should try to review all patches reasonably promptly,
> inevitably sometimes patches may fall through the cracks with each person
> reading the patch not being particularly confident in their expertise in
> the area or not having the time to review it then.
>
> Thus, I think the contribution checklist should advise contributors to
> ping (and keep pinging) any patch not reviewed within a week or so - and
> any readers with unreviewed patches should go ahead and ping them. ?This
> is in addition to the point discussed recently of filing a bug in Bugzilla
> if your patch fixes an unfiled bug, which should probably also go in the
> checklist. ?(It should perhaps also more generally be recommended to file
> a bug for any patch, including new features, that hasn't been reviewed
> reasonably promptly, to make sure it doesn't get lost.)
I agree.
Adjusted: sourceware.org/glibc/wiki/Contribution checklist
* Added a "Buzilla" section.
* Added a "Ping and ping again" section.
Cheers,
Carlos.