On Wed, 2003-08-06 at 20:18, Adam Majer wrote: > On Wed, Aug 06, 2003 at 04:27:24PM -0500, Joe Wreschnig wrote: > > On Wed, 2003-08-06 at 14:32, Steve Lamb wrote: > > > Except when your sponsor goes AWOL for 3 weeks after giving them the > > > URL > > > to download the packages to paw through and upload. > > > > This is not different than someone in your path-to-Linus being AWOL. It > > happens. > > Don't you just post a [PATCH] to the kenrel-devel mailing list?? > Then Linus applies it or not.
Don't you just file a bug with a patch tag?? Then the maintainer accepts it or not. This is the way it works now in Debian, too; the subtlties come in how the maintainer doesn't (or does) apply it. He might ignore it, or reject it explicitly. He might merge it silently. Or, equally likely, Linus pays little attention to it - one of the other main kernel hackers (Alan, Marcelo, Al Viro, whoever) includes it in one of their large patches, after reviewing it. Linus then applies them after what's probably a lot less review than he'd give some random patch alone. Face it - no free software project is "easy" to join (except apparently KDE...), and there's a reason for that. It's a process that selects against bad code and bad maintainers. It's also a process that happens to have false positives probably more often than it has false negatives. -- Joe Wreschnig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
