In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Robe rt Watson writes:
>Question 1: How should the presence of on-going work in an external >repository be announced to the broader community? On the project.freebsd.org web-page and the regular status emails generated from the contents of that web-page. >Question 2: How should the status of on-going work be announced to the >broader community? > >Suggestion: Bi-monthly developer status report >Suggestion: Status web page for the project >Suggestion: Regular status reports on work to relevant mailing lists All of the above with a s/Regular/As warranted/ on the third line. >Question 3: How should the results of the on-going work be made available >to the broader community? > >Suggestion: cvsup10 export of the Perforce tree >Suggestion: patchsets sent to appropriate mailing lists with status >Suggestion: patchsets generated automatically and posted to the mailing > list Whichever fits the particular project but it would be wonderful if a patch file for all projects could be accessed via the web-page. >Question 4: How agressively should on-going work be pushed back into the >base tree? > >Suggestion: For work requiring large source tree sweeps, API changes, etc, > only when the work is ready to commit. Panic: recursion: "commit only when ready to commit" Doesn't this one hinge on the stability/compilability goal of current and only that ? -- Poul-Henning Kamp | UNIX since Zilog Zeus 3.20 [EMAIL PROTECTED] | TCP/IP since RFC 956 FreeBSD committer | BSD since 4.3-tahoe Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by incompetence. To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
