On Fri, 11 Mar 2005, Giovanni Bajo wrote:
>> You may not have noticed that Gerald is away until 13 March. Otherwise
>> website patches do get reviewed quickly.
> I think they are not reviewed quickly enough anyway. I do not have
> evidence (statistics) to bring forward, so feel free to ignore my
> opinion.
I thought there might be some further discussion on this, potentially
with some delay, but there hasn't been, so let me pick this up.
> I'm not trying to accuse Gerald, I just believe that we should just
> find a faster path to get www patches in.
Here are some of measures we currently have to speed up the process:
1. (old) There is this robot of mine which checks every commit for
syntactic correctness so that other reviewers (who might be experts in
the field, but not web savvy) can approve patches more easily, people
can apply patches under the obvious rule with less hesitation, and I
can review patches faster because I don't have to care about details
too much.
2. I set up an automated link checker which will help along the same
lines plus ensure that the quality of our site will not degrade when
it comes to broken links.
3. As of today, I added documentation on marking web releated patches by
prefixing the subject with [wwwdocs] and I set up filters in my e-mail
client to highlight these to get my highest attention in the GCC lists.
> I'm unimpressed that changes.html is always incomplete, and develepors
> often update it only after explicit prompts from the Bugmasters.
I wanted the comment at the top of our gcc-x.y/changes.html pages
<!-- GCC maintainers, please do not hesitate to update/contribute entries
concerning those part of GCC you maintain! 2002-03-23, Gerald.
-->
to indicate that very maintainer is free to add/review items in his areas.
If it does not relay my intention clearly enough, this is an annoying bug
we should fix! Would you mind suggesting a better phrasing?
Also, I had hoped that I managed to relay the fact that I would like us
to interpret the "obviously correct" clause rather liberaly when it comes
to the web pages, but reading your comments that apparently was not too
successfull. How can we relay this better?
That said, if there are people interested in regularily helping with the
web pages, I definitely would not mind, rather to the contrary!
Gerald
