On Mon, Apr 7, 2014 at 4:52 PM, Samuel Thibault <samuel.thiba...@gnu.org>wrote:
> Put yet another way, if you ask me "why isn't foo done?" I'll most > probably just answer "because I haven't had time to do it, and nobody > else took the time to do it. If you ask me "could foo be done > then?", I'll answer "sure, patch welcome". If you ask me "I've had a > look, we could just apply this patch, move that, do this, and then we > get foo done", then the time for me to actually do it becomes almost > zero, and thus I'll happily do it. Yes, it means spending time on how > to do it, but if nobody else spends it, I'll have to do it, but god > knows when I'll find time to do it among all other urging matters. > > It's a time matter, and have improve space, I can understand how this is a challenging work to merge and adjust so much patches and the branches. The one who do this need have the full plan, and the big picture in the head, and done one by one carefully and leader by the initial big picture, hard as big refactor. we may need some level of frozen, to make this work easy if it's very important. The patch review mode maybe not suitable for this work, it's not minor improve. How about we make a upstream branch and do fast iterator merge and other stuff, we review this branch but not the patches, when it's OK, merge the branch to the main upstream branch or just use it as the main upstream branch? Thanks Cong Zhang
